Messages in this thread |  | | Subject | Re: [PATCH arm/aspeed/ast2500 v2] ipmi: add an Aspeed KCS IPMI BMC driver | From | "Wang, Haiyue" <> | Date | Mon, 29 Jan 2018 21:57:33 +0800 |
| |
On 2018-01-26 22:48, Corey Minyard wrote: > On 01/26/2018 12:08 AM, Wang, Haiyue wrote: >> >> >> On 2018-01-25 01:48, Corey Minyard wrote: >>> On 01/24/2018 10:06 AM, Haiyue Wang wrote: >>>> The KCS (Keyboard Controller Style) interface is used to perform >>>> in-band >>>> IPMI communication between a server host and its BMC (BaseBoard >>>> Management >>>> Controllers). >>>> >>>> This driver exposes the KCS interface on ASpeed SOCs (AST2400 and >>>> AST2500) >>>> as a character device. Such SOCs are commonly used as BMCs and this >>>> driver >>>> implements the BMC side of the KCS interface. >>>> >>>> Signed-off-by: Haiyue Wang <haiyue.wang@linux.intel.com> >>>> >>>> --- >>>> v1->v2 >>>> >>>> - Divide the driver into two parts, one handles the BMC KCS IPMI >>>> 2.0 state; >>>> the other handles the BMC KCS controller such as AST2500 IO >>>> accessing. >>>> - Use the spin lock APIs to handle the device file operations and >>>> BMC chip >>>> IRQ inferface for accessing the same KCS BMC data structure. >>>> - Enhanced the phases handling of the KCS BMC. >>>> - Unified the IOCTL definition for IPMI BMC, it will be used by KCS >>>> and BT. >>>> >>>> --- >>>> >>>> + >>>> +static void kcs_bmc_handle_data(struct kcs_bmc *kcs_bmc) >>>> +{ >>>> + u8 data; >>>> + >>>> + switch (kcs_bmc->phase) { >>>> + case KCS_PHASE_WRITE: >>>> + set_state(kcs_bmc, WRITE_STATE); >>>> + >>>> + /* set OBF before reading data */ >>>> + write_data(kcs_bmc, KCS_ZERO_DATA); >>>> + >>>> + if (kcs_bmc->data_in_idx < KCS_MSG_BUFSIZ) >>>> + kcs_bmc->data_in[kcs_bmc->data_in_idx++] = >>>> + read_data(kcs_bmc); > > I missed this earlier, you need to issue a length error if the data is > too large. > >>>> + break; >>>> + >>>> + case KCS_PHASE_WRITE_END: >>>> + set_state(kcs_bmc, READ_STATE); >>>> + >>>> + if (kcs_bmc->data_in_idx < KCS_MSG_BUFSIZ) >>>> + kcs_bmc->data_in[kcs_bmc->data_in_idx++] = >>>> + read_data(kcs_bmc); >>>> + >>>> + kcs_bmc->phase = KCS_PHASE_WAIT_READ; >>>> + if (kcs_bmc->running) { >>> >>> Why do you only do this when running is set? It won't hurt anything >>> if it's not >>> set. As it is, you have a race if something opens the device while >>> this code >>> runs. >>> >>> Also, don't set the state to wait read until the "write" has >>> finished (userland has >>> read the data out of the buffer. More on that later. >>> >> Understood. >>>> + kcs_bmc->data_in_avail = true; >>>> + wake_up_interruptible(&kcs_bmc->queue); >>>> + } >>>> + break; >>>> + >>>> + case KCS_PHASE_READ: >>>> + if (kcs_bmc->data_out_idx == kcs_bmc->data_out_len) >>>> + set_state(kcs_bmc, IDLE_STATE); >>>> + >>>> + data = read_data(kcs_bmc); >>>> + if (data != KCS_CMD_READ_BYTE) { >>>> + set_state(kcs_bmc, ERROR_STATE); >>>> + write_data(kcs_bmc, KCS_ZERO_DATA); >>>> + break; >>>> + } >>>> + >>>> + if (kcs_bmc->data_out_idx == kcs_bmc->data_out_len) { >>>> + write_data(kcs_bmc, KCS_ZERO_DATA); >>>> + kcs_bmc->phase = KCS_PHASE_IDLE; >>>> + break; >>>> + } >>>> + >>>> + write_data(kcs_bmc, >>>> + kcs_bmc->data_out[kcs_bmc->data_out_idx++]); >>>> + break; >>>> + >>>> + case KCS_PHASE_ABORT_ERROR1: >>>> + set_state(kcs_bmc, READ_STATE); >>>> + >>>> + /* Read the Dummy byte */ >>>> + read_data(kcs_bmc); >>>> + >>>> + write_data(kcs_bmc, kcs_bmc->error); >>>> + kcs_bmc->phase = KCS_PHASE_ABORT_ERROR2; >>>> + break; >>>> + >>>> + case KCS_PHASE_ABORT_ERROR2: >>>> + set_state(kcs_bmc, IDLE_STATE); >>>> + >>>> + /* Read the Dummy byte */ >>>> + read_data(kcs_bmc); >>>> + >>>> + write_data(kcs_bmc, KCS_ZERO_DATA); >>>> + kcs_bmc->phase = KCS_PHASE_IDLE; >>>> + >>>> + break; >>>> + >>>> + default: >>>> + set_state(kcs_bmc, ERROR_STATE); >>>> + >>>> + /* Read the Dummy byte */ >>>> + read_data(kcs_bmc); >>>> + >>>> + write_data(kcs_bmc, KCS_ZERO_DATA); >>>> + break; >>>> + } >>>> +} >>>> + >>>> +static void kcs_bmc_handle_command(struct kcs_bmc *kcs_bmc) >>>> +{ >>>> + u8 cmd; >>>> + >>>> + set_state(kcs_bmc, WRITE_STATE); >>>> + >>>> + /* Dummy data to generate OBF */ >>>> + write_data(kcs_bmc, KCS_ZERO_DATA); >>>> + >>>> + cmd = read_data(kcs_bmc); >>> >>> Shouldn't you check the phase in all the cases below and do error >>> handling if the phase isn't correct? >>> >>> Similar thing if the device here isn't open. You need to handle >>> that gracefully. >>> >>> Also, you should remove data_in_avail and data_in_idx setting from >>> here, for reasons I will explain later. >>> >> If host software sends the data twice such as a retry before the >> BMC's IPMI service starts, >> then the two IPMI requests will be merged into one, if not clear >> data_in_idx after receving >> KCS_CMD_WRITE_START. Most of the states are driven by host software >> (SMS). :( > > True, but what if the host issues WRITE_START or a WRITE_END while > this driver is in read > state? The spec is unclear on this, but it really only makes sense > for the host to issue > WRITE_START in idle stat and WRITE_END in write state. IMHO it should > go to error > state. You might make the case that a WRITE_START anywhere restarts > the transaction, > but the feel of the error state machine kind of goes against that. > WRITE_END is definitely > wrong anywhere but write state. > > I just found the following in the spec (section 9.12): > > Thus, since the interface will allow a command transfer to be > started or restarted > at any time when the input buffer is empty, software could elect to > simply retry > the command upon detecting an error condition, or issue a ‘known good’ > command in order to clear ERROR_STATE > > So a WRITE_START anywhere is ok. A WRITE_END in the wrong state > should probably > still go to error state. This means the user needs to be able to > handle a write error at > any time. It also means it's very important to make sure the user > does a read before > doing a write. If the host re-issues a WRITE_START and writes a new > command > between the time the use reads the data and writes the response, the > response would > be for the wrong command. > >>>> + switch (cmd) { >>>> + case KCS_CMD_WRITE_START: >>>> + kcs_bmc->data_in_avail = false; >>>> + kcs_bmc->data_in_idx = 0; >>>> + kcs_bmc->phase = KCS_PHASE_WRITE; >>>> + kcs_bmc->error = KCS_NO_ERROR; >>>> + break; >>>> + >>>> + case KCS_CMD_WRITE_END: >>>> + kcs_bmc->phase = KCS_PHASE_WRITE_END; >>>> + break; >>>> + >>>> + case KCS_CMD_ABORT: >>>> + if (kcs_bmc->error == KCS_NO_ERROR) >>>> + kcs_bmc->error = KCS_ABORTED_BY_COMMAND; >>>> + >>>> + kcs_bmc->phase = KCS_PHASE_ABORT_ERROR1; >>>> + break; >>>> + >>>> + default: >>>> + kcs_bmc->error = KCS_ILLEGAL_CONTROL_CODE; >>>> + set_state(kcs_bmc, ERROR_STATE); >>>> + write_data(kcs_bmc, kcs_bmc->error); >>>> + kcs_bmc->phase = KCS_PHASE_ERROR; >>>> + break; >>>> + } >>>> +} >>>> + >>>> +int kcs_bmc_handle_event(struct kcs_bmc *kcs_bmc) >>>> +{ >>>> + unsigned long flags; >>>> + int ret = 0; >>>> + u8 status; >>>> + >>>> + spin_lock_irqsave(&kcs_bmc->lock, flags); >>>> + >>>> + status = read_status(kcs_bmc) & (KCS_STATUS_IBF | >>>> KCS_STATUS_CMD_DAT); >>>> + >>>> + switch (status) { >>>> + case KCS_STATUS_IBF | KCS_STATUS_CMD_DAT: >>>> + kcs_bmc_handle_command(kcs_bmc); >>>> + break; >>>> + >>>> + case KCS_STATUS_IBF: >>>> + kcs_bmc_handle_data(kcs_bmc); >>>> + break; >>>> + >>>> + default: >>>> + ret = -1; >>>> + break; >>>> + } >>>> + >>>> + spin_unlock_irqrestore(&kcs_bmc->lock, flags); >>>> + >>>> + return ret; >>>> +} >>>> +EXPORT_SYMBOL(kcs_bmc_handle_event); >>>> + >>>> +static inline struct kcs_bmc *file_kcs_bmc(struct file *filp) >>>> +{ >>>> + return container_of(filp->private_data, struct kcs_bmc, miscdev); >>>> +} >>>> + >>>> +static int kcs_bmc_open(struct inode *inode, struct file *filp) >>>> +{ >>>> + struct kcs_bmc *kcs_bmc = file_kcs_bmc(filp); >>>> + int ret = 0; >>>> + >>>> + spin_lock_irq(&kcs_bmc->lock); >>>> + >>>> + if (!kcs_bmc->running) { >>>> + kcs_bmc->running = 1; >>>> + kcs_bmc->phase = KCS_PHASE_IDLE; >>>> + kcs_bmc->data_in_avail = false; >>> >>> If you do everything right, setting the phase and data_in_avail >>> should not >>> be necessary here. >>> >>>> + } else { >>>> + ret = -EBUSY; >>>> + } >>>> + >>>> + spin_unlock_irq(&kcs_bmc->lock); >>>> + >>>> + return ret; >>>> +} >>>> + >>>> +static unsigned int kcs_bmc_poll(struct file *filp, poll_table *wait) >>>> +{ >>>> + struct kcs_bmc *kcs_bmc = file_kcs_bmc(filp); >>>> + unsigned int mask = 0; >>>> + >>>> + poll_wait(filp, &kcs_bmc->queue, wait); >>>> + >>>> + spin_lock_irq(&kcs_bmc->lock); >>>> + >>>> + if (kcs_bmc->data_in_avail) >>>> + mask |= POLLIN; >>>> + >>>> + spin_unlock_irq(&kcs_bmc->lock); >>>> + >>>> + return mask; >>>> +} >>>> + >>>> +static ssize_t kcs_bmc_read(struct file *filp, char *buf, >>>> + size_t count, loff_t *offset) >>>> +{ >>>> + struct kcs_bmc *kcs_bmc = file_kcs_bmc(filp); >>>> + ssize_t ret = -EAGAIN; >>>> + >>> >>> This function still has some issues. >>> >>> You can't call copy_to_user() with a spinlock held or interrupts >>> disabled. >>> To handle readers, you probably need a separate mutex. >>> >>> Also, this function can return -EAGAIN even if O_NONBLOCK is not set if >>> kcs_bmc->data_in_avail changes between when you wait on the event >>> and when you check it under the lock. >>> >>> You also clear data_in_avail even if the copy_to_user() fails, which is >>> wrong. >>> >>> I believe the best way to handle this would be to have the spinlock >>> protect the inner workings of the state machine and a mutex handle >>> copying data out, setting/clearing the running flag (thus a mutex >>> instead of spinlock in open and release) and the ioctl settings (except >>> for abort where you will need to grab the spinlock). >>> >>> After the wait event below, grab the mutex. If data is not available >>> and O_NONBLOCK is not set, drop the mutex and retry. Otherwise >>> this is the only place (besides release) that sets data_in_avail to >>> false. >>> Do the copy_to_user(), grab the spinlock, clear data_in_avail and >>> data_in_idx, then release the lock and mutex. If you are really >>> adventurous you can do this without grabbing the lock using >>> barriers, but it's probably not necessary here. >>> > > With the state machine being able to be restarted at any time, you need > something a little different here. You still need the mutex to handle > multiple readers and the copy. I think the function should be something > like: > Since KCS is not a multi-reader protocol from BMC's view, you makes things complex. :-) > static ssize_t kcs_bmc_read(struct file *filp, char *buf, > size_t count, loff_t *offset) > { > struct kcs_bmc *kcs_bmc = file_kcs_bmc(filp); > ssize_t ret; > bool avail; > size_t data_size; > u8 *data; > > data = kmalloc(KCS_MSG_BUFSIZ, GFP_KERNEL); > if (!data) > return -ENOMEM; > > retry: > ret = -EAGAIN; > if (!(filp->f_flags & O_NONBLOCK)) > wait_event_interruptible(kcs_bmc->queue, > kcs_bmc->data_in_avail); > > mutex_lock(&kcs_bmc->read_mutex); > > spin_lock_irq(&kcs_bmc->lock); > avail = kcs_bmc->data_in_avail; > if (avail) { > memcpy(data, kcs_bmc->data_in, kcs_bmc->data_in_idx); > data_size = kcs_bmc->data_in_idx; > } > spin_unlock_irq(&kcs_bmc->lock); > > if (!avail) { > if (filp->f_flags & O_NONBLOCK) > goto out_mutex_unlock; > mutex_unlock(&kcs_bmc->read_mutex); > goto retry; > } > > if (count < data_size) { > ret = -EOVERFLOW; > ? I'm not sure about the error, but userspace needs to know. > goto out_mutex_unlock; > } > > if (!copy_to_user(buf, data, data_size)) { > ret = -EFAULT; > goto out_mutex_unlock; > } > > ret = data_size; > > spin_lock_irq(&kcs_bmc->lock); > > if (kcs_bmc->phase != KCS_PHASE_WRITE_END_DONE) > /* Something aborted or restarted the state machine. */ > ? Maybe restart if O_NONBLOCK is not set and -EAGAIN if it > is? > ret = -EIO; > } else { > kcs_bmc->phase = KCS_PHASE_WAIT_READ; > kcs_bmc->data_in_avail = false; > kcs_bmc->data_in_idx = 0; > } > > spin_unlock_irq(&kcs_bmc->lock); > > out_mutex_unlock: > mutex_unlock(&kcs_bmc->read_mutex); > > kfree(data); > > return ret; > } > Note that I added a state, KCS_PHASE_WRITE_END_DONE, which would be > set after the final byte from the host is received. You want the read > here > done before you can do the write below to avoid the race I talked about. > > There is a local copy made of the data. What you *never* want to happen > here is for the state machine to start processing a new write command > while the data is being copied. It could result in corrupt data being > read > and some random operation being done by the BMC. > > If you want to avoid the local copy, it could be done, but it's more > complex. > >>>> + if (!(filp->f_flags & O_NONBLOCK)) >>>> + wait_event_interruptible(kcs_bmc->queue, >>>> + kcs_bmc->data_in_avail); >>>> + >>>> + spin_lock_irq(&kcs_bmc->lock); >>>> + >>>> + if (kcs_bmc->data_in_avail) { >>>> + kcs_bmc->data_in_avail = false; >>>> + >>>> + if (count > kcs_bmc->data_in_idx) >>>> + count = kcs_bmc->data_in_idx; >>>> + >>>> + if (!copy_to_user(buf, kcs_bmc->data_in, count)) >>>> + ret = count; >>>> + else >>>> + ret = -EFAULT; >>>> + } >>>> + >>>> + spin_unlock_irq(&kcs_bmc->lock); >>>> + >>>> + return ret; >>>> +} >>>> + >>>> +static ssize_t kcs_bmc_write(struct file *filp, const char *buf, >>>> + size_t count, loff_t *offset) >>>> +{ >>>> + struct kcs_bmc *kcs_bmc = file_kcs_bmc(filp); >>>> + ssize_t ret = count; >>>> + >>>> + if (count < 1 || count > KCS_MSG_BUFSIZ) >>>> + return -EINVAL; >>>> + >>>> + spin_lock_irq(&kcs_bmc->lock); >>>> + >>>> + if (kcs_bmc->phase == KCS_PHASE_WAIT_READ) { >>>> + if (copy_from_user(kcs_bmc->data_out, buf, count)) { >>>> + spin_unlock_irq(&kcs_bmc->lock); >>>> + return -EFAULT; >>>> + } >>>> + >>>> + kcs_bmc->phase = KCS_PHASE_READ; >>>> + kcs_bmc->data_out_idx = 1; >>>> + kcs_bmc->data_out_len = count; >>>> + write_data(kcs_bmc, kcs_bmc->data_out[0]); >>>> + } else if (kcs_bmc->phase == KCS_PHASE_READ) { >>>> + ret = -EBUSY; >>>> + } else { >>>> + ret = -EINVAL; >>> >>> Is there a reason you return -EINVAL here? Why not just -EBUSY in all >>> cases? Is there something that userland will need to do differently? >>> >>>> + } >>>> + >>>> + spin_unlock_irq(&kcs_bmc->lock); >>>> + >>>> + return ret; >>>> +} >>>> + >>>> +static long kcs_bmc_ioctl(struct file *filp, unsigned int cmd, >>>> + unsigned long arg) >>>> +{ >>>> + struct kcs_bmc *kcs_bmc = file_kcs_bmc(filp); >>>> + long ret = 0; >>>> + >>>> + spin_lock_irq(&kcs_bmc->lock); >>>> + >>>> + switch (cmd) { >>>> + case IPMI_BMC_IOCTL_SET_SMS_ATN: >>>> + update_status_bits(kcs_bmc, KCS_STATUS_SMS_ATN, >>>> + KCS_STATUS_SMS_ATN); >>>> + break; >>>> + >>>> + case IPMI_BMC_IOCTL_CLEAR_SMS_ATN: >>>> + update_status_bits(kcs_bmc, KCS_STATUS_SMS_ATN, >>>> + 0); >>>> + break; >>>> + >>>> + case IPMI_BMC_IOCTL_FORCE_ABORT: >>>> + set_state(kcs_bmc, ERROR_STATE); >>>> + read_data(kcs_bmc); >>>> + write_data(kcs_bmc, KCS_ZERO_DATA); >>>> + >>>> + kcs_bmc->phase = KCS_PHASE_ERROR; >>>> + kcs_bmc->data_in_avail = false; >>>> + break; >>>> + >>>> + default: >>>> + ret = -EINVAL; >>>> + break; >>>> + } >>>> + >>>> + spin_unlock_irq(&kcs_bmc->lock); >>>> + >>>> + return ret; >>>> +} >>>> + >>>> +static int kcs_bmc_release(struct inode *inode, struct file *filp) >>>> +{ >>>> + struct kcs_bmc *kcs_bmc = file_kcs_bmc(filp); >>>> + >>> >>> What happens if the device gets closed in the middle of a >>> transaction? That's >>> an important case to handle. If something is in process, you need >>> to abort it. >>> >> The device just provides the read & write data, the transaction is >> handled in the KCS >> controller's IRQ handler. > > From the spec, section 9.14: > > The BMC must change the status to ERROR_STATE on any condition > where it > aborts a command transfer in progress. > > So you need to do something here. > In practice, we do this as spec said in ipmid, NOT in driver, driver can't handle anything, let's make it simple, thanks!
Whenever the BMC is reset (from power-on or a hard reset), the State Bits are initialized to “11 - Error State”. Doing so allows SMS to detect that the BMC has been reset and that any message in process has been terminated by the BMC. >>>> + spin_lock_irq(&kcs_bmc->lock); >>>> + >>>> + kcs_bmc->running = 0; >>>> + >>>> + spin_unlock_irq(&kcs_bmc->lock); >>>> + >>>> + return 0; >>>> +} >>>> + > >
|  |