Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

Sign up for GitHub

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Jump to bottom

disable acpi function when config acpi pin #167

Closed
wants to merge 1 commit into from
Closed

disable acpi function when config acpi pin #167

wants to merge 1 commit into from

Conversation

qianlihu8906
Copy link

example set P21 to GPIOY3

the mux pin config

SIG_EXPR_DECL(SIOPWREQ, SIOPWREQ, SIG_DESC_SET(SCUA4, 10));
SIG_EXPR_DECL(SIOPWREQ, ACPI, ACPI_DESC);
SIG_EXPR_LIST_DECL_DUAL(SIOPWREQ, SIOPWREQ, ACPI);
SIG_EXPR_LIST_DECL_SINGLE(DASHP22, DASHP22, SIG_DESC_SET(SCU94, 11));

MS_PIN_DECL(P21, GPIOY3, SIOONCTRL, DASHP21); //MS_PIN_DECL(pin, other, high, low)

when set the pin, should disable the FUNCTION ACPI ,the function aspeed_sig_expr_set do it

 if (desc->ip == ASPEED_IP_SCU && desc->reg == HW_STRAP1 &&
                     !(desc->mask & (BIT(21) | BIT(22))))   //skip,so can not disable acpi
                          continue;

i change it to

 if (desc->ip == ASPEED_IP_SCU && desc->reg == HW_STRAP1 &&
~                     !(desc->mask & (BIT(21) | BIT(22) | BIT(19))))
                          continue;

@qianlihu8906 qianlihu8906 reopened this Oct 31, 2018
shenki pushed a commit that referenced this pull request May 24, 2021
@anakryiko @gregkh
selftests/bpf: Fix BPF_CORE_READ_BITFIELD() macro
3769c54 
[ Upstream commit 0f20615 ]

Fix BPF_CORE_READ_BITFIELD() macro used for reading CO-RE-relocatable
bitfields. Missing breaks in a switch caused 8-byte reads always. This can
confuse libbpf because it does strict checks that memory load size corresponds
to the original size of the field, which in this case quite often would be
wrong.

After fixing that, we run into another problem, which quite subtle, so worth
documenting here. The issue is in Clang optimization and CO-RE relocation
interactions. Without that asm volatile construct (also known as
barrier_var()), Clang will re-order BYTE_OFFSET and BYTE_SIZE relocations and
will apply BYTE_OFFSET 4 times for each switch case arm. This will result in
the same error from libbpf about mismatch of memory load size and original
field size. I.e., if we were reading u32, we'd still have *(u8 *), *(u16 *),
*(u32 *), and *(u64 *) memory loads, three of which will fail. Using
barrier_var() forces Clang to apply BYTE_OFFSET relocation first (and once) to
calculate p, after which value of p is used without relocation in each of
switch case arms, doing appropiately-sized memory load.

Here's the list of relevant relocations and pieces of generated BPF code
before and after this patch for test_core_reloc_bitfields_direct selftests.

BEFORE
=====
 #45: core_reloc: insn #160 --> [5] + 0:5: byte_sz --> struct core_reloc_bitfields.u32
 #46: core_reloc: insn #167 --> [5] + 0:5: byte_off --> struct core_reloc_bitfields.u32
 #47: core_reloc: insn #174 --> [5] + 0:5: byte_off --> struct core_reloc_bitfields.u32
 #48: core_reloc: insn #178 --> [5] + 0:5: byte_off --> struct core_reloc_bitfields.u32
 #49: core_reloc: insn #182 --> [5] + 0:5: byte_off --> struct core_reloc_bitfields.u32

     157:       18 02 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 r2 = 0 ll
     159:       7b 12 20 01 00 00 00 00 *(u64 *)(r2 + 288) = r1
     160:       b7 02 00 00 04 00 00 00 r2 = 4
; BYTE_SIZE relocation here                 ^^^
     161:       66 02 07 00 03 00 00 00 if w2 s> 3 goto +7 <LBB0_63>
     162:       16 02 0d 00 01 00 00 00 if w2 == 1 goto +13 <LBB0_65>
     163:       16 02 01 00 02 00 00 00 if w2 == 2 goto +1 <LBB0_66>
     164:       05 00 12 00 00 00 00 00 goto +18 <LBB0_69>

0000000000000528 <LBB0_66>:
     165:       18 01 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 r1 = 0 ll
     167:       69 11 08 00 00 00 00 00 r1 = *(u16 *)(r1 + 8)
; BYTE_OFFSET relo here w/ WRONG size        ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
     168:       05 00 0e 00 00 00 00 00 goto +14 <LBB0_69>

0000000000000548 <LBB0_63>:
     169:       16 02 0a 00 04 00 00 00 if w2 == 4 goto +10 <LBB0_67>
     170:       16 02 01 00 08 00 00 00 if w2 == 8 goto +1 <LBB0_68>
     171:       05 00 0b 00 00 00 00 00 goto +11 <LBB0_69>

0000000000000560 <LBB0_68>:
     172:       18 01 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 r1 = 0 ll
     174:       79 11 08 00 00 00 00 00 r1 = *(u64 *)(r1 + 8)
; BYTE_OFFSET relo here w/ WRONG size        ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
     175:       05 00 07 00 00 00 00 00 goto +7 <LBB0_69>

0000000000000580 <LBB0_65>:
     176:       18 01 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 r1 = 0 ll
     178:       71 11 08 00 00 00 00 00 r1 = *(u8 *)(r1 + 8)
; BYTE_OFFSET relo here w/ WRONG size        ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
     179:       05 00 03 00 00 00 00 00 goto +3 <LBB0_69>

00000000000005a0 <LBB0_67>:
     180:       18 01 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 r1 = 0 ll
     182:       61 11 08 00 00 00 00 00 r1 = *(u32 *)(r1 + 8)
; BYTE_OFFSET relo here w/ RIGHT size        ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

00000000000005b8 <LBB0_69>:
     183:       67 01 00 00 20 00 00 00 r1 <<= 32
     184:       b7 02 00 00 00 00 00 00 r2 = 0
     185:       16 02 02 00 00 00 00 00 if w2 == 0 goto +2 <LBB0_71>
     186:       c7 01 00 00 20 00 00 00 r1 s>>= 32
     187:       05 00 01 00 00 00 00 00 goto +1 <LBB0_72>

00000000000005e0 <LBB0_71>:
     188:       77 01 00 00 20 00 00 00 r1 >>= 32

AFTER
=====

 #30: core_reloc: insn #132 --> [5] + 0:5: byte_off --> struct core_reloc_bitfields.u32
 #31: core_reloc: insn #134 --> [5] + 0:5: byte_sz --> struct core_reloc_bitfields.u32

     129:       18 02 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 r2 = 0 ll
     131:       7b 12 20 01 00 00 00 00 *(u64 *)(r2 + 288) = r1
     132:       b7 01 00 00 08 00 00 00 r1 = 8
; BYTE_OFFSET relo here                     ^^^
; no size check for non-memory dereferencing instructions
     133:       0f 12 00 00 00 00 00 00 r2 += r1
     134:       b7 03 00 00 04 00 00 00 r3 = 4
; BYTE_SIZE relocation here                 ^^^
     135:       66 03 05 00 03 00 00 00 if w3 s> 3 goto +5 <LBB0_63>
     136:       16 03 09 00 01 00 00 00 if w3 == 1 goto +9 <LBB0_65>
     137:       16 03 01 00 02 00 00 00 if w3 == 2 goto +1 <LBB0_66>
     138:       05 00 0a 00 00 00 00 00 goto +10 <LBB0_69>

0000000000000458 <LBB0_66>:
     139:       69 21 00 00 00 00 00 00 r1 = *(u16 *)(r2 + 0)
; NO CO-RE relocation here                   ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
     140:       05 00 08 00 00 00 00 00 goto +8 <LBB0_69>

0000000000000468 <LBB0_63>:
     141:       16 03 06 00 04 00 00 00 if w3 == 4 goto +6 <LBB0_67>
     142:       16 03 01 00 08 00 00 00 if w3 == 8 goto +1 <LBB0_68>
     143:       05 00 05 00 00 00 00 00 goto +5 <LBB0_69>

0000000000000480 <LBB0_68>:
     144:       79 21 00 00 00 00 00 00 r1 = *(u64 *)(r2 + 0)
; NO CO-RE relocation here                   ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
     145:       05 00 03 00 00 00 00 00 goto +3 <LBB0_69>

0000000000000490 <LBB0_65>:
     146:       71 21 00 00 00 00 00 00 r1 = *(u8 *)(r2 + 0)
; NO CO-RE relocation here                   ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
     147:       05 00 01 00 00 00 00 00 goto +1 <LBB0_69>

00000000000004a0 <LBB0_67>:
     148:       61 21 00 00 00 00 00 00 r1 = *(u32 *)(r2 + 0)
; NO CO-RE relocation here                   ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

00000000000004a8 <LBB0_69>:
     149:       67 01 00 00 20 00 00 00 r1 <<= 32
     150:       b7 02 00 00 00 00 00 00 r2 = 0
     151:       16 02 02 00 00 00 00 00 if w2 == 0 goto +2 <LBB0_71>
     152:       c7 01 00 00 20 00 00 00 r1 s>>= 32
     153:       05 00 01 00 00 00 00 00 goto +1 <LBB0_72>

00000000000004d0 <LBB0_71>:
     154:       77 01 00 00 20 00 00 00 r1 >>= 323

Fixes: ee26dad ("libbpf: Add support for relocatable bitfields")
Signed-off-by: Andrii Nakryiko <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <[email protected]>
Acked-by: Lorenz Bauer <[email protected]>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/[email protected]
Signed-off-by: Sasha Levin <[email protected]>
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Reviewers
No reviews
Assignees
No one assigned
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Milestone
No milestone
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.
1 participant
@qianlihu8906