crypto/nx842: Ignore queue overflow informative error
NX842 coprocessor sets bit 3 if queue is overflow. It is just for
information to the user. So the driver prints this informative message
and ignores it.
Signed-off-by: Haren Myneni
diff --git a/arch/powerpc/include/asm/icswx.h b/arch/powerpc/include/asm/icswx.h
index 9f8402b..d1a2a2d 100644
--- a/arch/powerpc/include/asm/icswx.h
+++ b/arch/powerpc/include/asm/icswx.h
@@ -164,6 +164,7 @@ struct coprocessor_request_block {
#define ICSWX_INITIATED(0x8)
#define ICSWX_BUSY (0x4)
#define ICSWX_REJECTED (0x2)
+#define ICSWX_BIT3 (0x1) /* undefined or set from XERSO. */
static inline int icswx(__be32 ccw, struct coprocessor_request_block *crb)
{
diff --git a/drivers/crypto/nx/nx-842-powernv.c
b/drivers/crypto/nx/nx-842-powernv.c
index 9ef51fa..321b8e8 100644
--- a/drivers/crypto/nx/nx-842-powernv.c
+++ b/drivers/crypto/nx/nx-842-powernv.c
@@ -442,6 +442,15 @@ static int nx842_powernv_function(const unsigned char *in,
unsigned int inlen,
(unsigned int)ccw,
(unsigned int)be32_to_cpu(crb->ccw));
+ /*
+* NX842 coprocessor uses 3rd bit to report queue overflow which is
+* not an error, just for information to user. So, ignore this bit.
+*/
+ if (ret & ICSWX_BIT3) {
+ pr_info_ratelimited("842 coprocessor queue overflow\n");
+ ret &= ~ICSWX_BIT3;
+ }
+
switch (ret) {
case ICSWX_INITIATED:
ret = wait_for_csb(wmem, csb);
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-crypto" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Re: crypto/nx842: Ignore queue overflow informative error
Haren Myneni writes:
> NX842 coprocessor sets bit 3 if queue is overflow. It is just for
> information to the user. So the driver prints this informative message
> and ignores it.
What queue, and what happens when the queue overflows? It seems like
*something* would need to be done, somewhere, by someone?
I realise that as a piece of IBM hardware this is probably an incredibly
optimistic question, but is this behaviour documented publically anywhere?
(As a distant second best, is it documented internally anywhere that I
can read?)
> --- a/drivers/crypto/nx/nx-842-powernv.c
> +++ b/drivers/crypto/nx/nx-842-powernv.c
> @@ -442,6 +442,15 @@ static int nx842_powernv_function(const unsigned char
> *in, unsigned int inlen,
>(unsigned int)ccw,
>(unsigned int)be32_to_cpu(crb->ccw));
>
> + /*
> + * NX842 coprocessor uses 3rd bit to report queue overflow which is
> + * not an error, just for information to user. So, ignore this bit.
> + */
> + if (ret & ICSWX_BIT3) {
> + pr_info_ratelimited("842 coprocessor queue overflow\n");
It doesn't look like this is done anywhere else in the file, but should
this be prefixed with something? Something like "nx-842: Coprocessor
queue overflow"?
Regards,
Daniel
> + ret &= ~ICSWX_BIT3;
> + }
> +
> switch (ret) {
> case ICSWX_INITIATED:
> ret = wait_for_csb(wmem, csb);
>
>
> ___
> Linuxppc-dev mailing list
> linuxppc-...@lists.ozlabs.org
> https://lists.ozlabs.org/listinfo/linuxppc-dev
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
Re: crypto/nx842: Ignore queue overflow informative error
On Sun, Dec 6, 2015 at 2:46 AM, Haren Myneni wrote:
>
> NX842 coprocessor sets bit 3 if queue is overflow. It is just for
> information to the user. So the driver prints this informative message
> and ignores it.
>
> Signed-off-by: Haren Myneni
>
> diff --git a/arch/powerpc/include/asm/icswx.h
> b/arch/powerpc/include/asm/icswx.h
> index 9f8402b..d1a2a2d 100644
> --- a/arch/powerpc/include/asm/icswx.h
> +++ b/arch/powerpc/include/asm/icswx.h
> @@ -164,6 +164,7 @@ struct coprocessor_request_block {
> #define ICSWX_INITIATED(0x8)
> #define ICSWX_BUSY (0x4)
> #define ICSWX_REJECTED (0x2)
> +#define ICSWX_BIT3 (0x1) /* undefined or set from XERSO. */
Since this isn't defined by the icswx rfc workbook, it probably
shouldn't go here, it would make more sense to put it into nx-842.h
and call it something like "ICSWX_NX_QUEUE_OVERFLOW" or similar
NX-specific meaningful name.
>
> static inline int icswx(__be32 ccw, struct coprocessor_request_block *crb)
> {
> diff --git a/drivers/crypto/nx/nx-842-powernv.c
> b/drivers/crypto/nx/nx-842-powernv.c
> index 9ef51fa..321b8e8 100644
> --- a/drivers/crypto/nx/nx-842-powernv.c
> +++ b/drivers/crypto/nx/nx-842-powernv.c
> @@ -442,6 +442,15 @@ static int nx842_powernv_function(const unsigned char
> *in, unsigned int inlen,
> (unsigned int)ccw,
> (unsigned int)be32_to_cpu(crb->ccw));
>
> + /*
> +* NX842 coprocessor uses 3rd bit to report queue overflow which is
> +* not an error, just for information to user. So, ignore this bit.
> +*/
a meaningfully named bit define means you don't need to explain it
with a comment :-)
However, I suggest that you do explain *why* a queue overflow isn't an
error - either here or (probably better) at the #define of the bit -
because that isn't obvious.
> + if (ret & ICSWX_BIT3) {
> + pr_info_ratelimited("842 coprocessor queue overflow\n");
if it's not an error, should this be pr_debug_ratelimited instead?
What is an end user expected to do if they see this msg in the log?
> + ret &= ~ICSWX_BIT3;
> + }
> +
> switch (ret) {
> case ICSWX_INITIATED:
> ret = wait_for_csb(wmem, csb);
>
>
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-crypto" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Re: crypto/nx842: Ignore queue overflow informative error
On Sun, Dec 6, 2015 at 5:57 PM, Daniel Axtens wrote:
> Haren Myneni writes:
>
>> NX842 coprocessor sets bit 3 if queue is overflow. It is just for
>> information to the user. So the driver prints this informative message
>> and ignores it.
>
> What queue, and what happens when the queue overflows? It seems like
> *something* would need to be done, somewhere, by someone?
>
> I realise that as a piece of IBM hardware this is probably an incredibly
> optimistic question, but is this behaviour documented publically anywhere?
> (As a distant second best, is it documented internally anywhere that I
> can read?)
When I worked there, it unfortunately wasn't public and there was no
future plan to make it public, but things might have changed since I
left. Maybe it will be included in future openpower documentation...?
>
>> --- a/drivers/crypto/nx/nx-842-powernv.c
>> +++ b/drivers/crypto/nx/nx-842-powernv.c
>> @@ -442,6 +442,15 @@ static int nx842_powernv_function(const unsigned char
>> *in, unsigned int inlen,
>>(unsigned int)ccw,
>>(unsigned int)be32_to_cpu(crb->ccw));
>>
>> + /*
>> + * NX842 coprocessor uses 3rd bit to report queue overflow which is
>> + * not an error, just for information to user. So, ignore this bit.
>> + */
>> + if (ret & ICSWX_BIT3) {
>> + pr_info_ratelimited("842 coprocessor queue overflow\n");
> It doesn't look like this is done anywhere else in the file, but should
> this be prefixed with something? Something like "nx-842: Coprocessor
> queue overflow"?
it defines pr_fmt at the top of the file so it will be prefixed with
the module name.
>
> Regards,
> Daniel
>
>> + ret &= ~ICSWX_BIT3;
>> + }
>> +
>> switch (ret) {
>> case ICSWX_INITIATED:
>> ret = wait_for_csb(wmem, csb);
>>
>>
>> ___
>> Linuxppc-dev mailing list
>> linuxppc-...@lists.ozlabs.org
>> https://lists.ozlabs.org/listinfo/linuxppc-dev
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-crypto" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Re: crypto/nx842: Ignore queue overflow informative error
On 12/07/2015 11:34 AM, Dan Streetman wrote:
> On Sun, Dec 6, 2015 at 2:46 AM, Haren Myneni wrote:
>>
>> NX842 coprocessor sets bit 3 if queue is overflow. It is just for
>> information to the user. So the driver prints this informative message
>> and ignores it.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Haren Myneni
>>
>> diff --git a/arch/powerpc/include/asm/icswx.h
>> b/arch/powerpc/include/asm/icswx.h
>> index 9f8402b..d1a2a2d 100644
>> --- a/arch/powerpc/include/asm/icswx.h
>> +++ b/arch/powerpc/include/asm/icswx.h
>> @@ -164,6 +164,7 @@ struct coprocessor_request_block {
>> #define ICSWX_INITIATED(0x8)
>> #define ICSWX_BUSY (0x4)
>> #define ICSWX_REJECTED (0x2)
>> +#define ICSWX_BIT3 (0x1) /* undefined or set from XERSO. */
>
> Since this isn't defined by the icswx rfc workbook, it probably
> shouldn't go here, it would make more sense to put it into nx-842.h
> and call it something like "ICSWX_NX_QUEUE_OVERFLOW" or similar
> NX-specific meaningful name.
This bit is defined in icswx RFC. Hence I think we should define this in
icswx.h.
"Bit 3 of CR0 is undefined or set from XERSO."
Please ignore this patch. Talking to HW team, whenever gets floating point
overflow from FPU, XER[S0] will be set and it stays until other FPU operation
is executed. It is typical behaviour on powerpc. ixswx RFC says coprocessor can
set this XER[S0] to bit 3 and NX is doing this. I think it should have ignored
this bit.
"An implementation is permitted to set bit 3 of CR0 from XERSO."
So,the issue is not queue overflow problem, but NX is copying XER[S0] which is
no use and nothing to do with compression. We need to ignore this bit since it
can be set with other valuable return status. I will repost new patch with the
proper description.
Thanks
Haren
>
>>
>> static inline int icswx(__be32 ccw, struct coprocessor_request_block *crb)
>> {
>> diff --git a/drivers/crypto/nx/nx-842-powernv.c
>> b/drivers/crypto/nx/nx-842-powernv.c
>> index 9ef51fa..321b8e8 100644
>> --- a/drivers/crypto/nx/nx-842-powernv.c
>> +++ b/drivers/crypto/nx/nx-842-powernv.c
>> @@ -442,6 +442,15 @@ static int nx842_powernv_function(const unsigned char
>> *in, unsigned int inlen,
>> (unsigned int)ccw,
>> (unsigned int)be32_to_cpu(crb->ccw));
>>
>> + /*
>> +* NX842 coprocessor uses 3rd bit to report queue overflow which is
>> +* not an error, just for information to user. So, ignore this bit.
>> +*/
>
> a meaningfully named bit define means you don't need to explain it
> with a comment :-)
>
> However, I suggest that you do explain *why* a queue overflow isn't an
> error - either here or (probably better) at the #define of the bit -
> because that isn't obvious.
>
>> + if (ret & ICSWX_BIT3) {
>> + pr_info_ratelimited("842 coprocessor queue overflow\n");
>
> if it's not an error, should this be pr_debug_ratelimited instead?
> What is an end user expected to do if they see this msg in the log?
>
>> + ret &= ~ICSWX_BIT3;
>> + }
>> +
>> switch (ret) {
>> case ICSWX_INITIATED:
>> ret = wait_for_csb(wmem, csb);
>>
>>
> ___
> Linuxppc-dev mailing list
> linuxppc-...@lists.ozlabs.org
> https://lists.ozlabs.org/listinfo/linuxppc-dev
>
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-crypto" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
