Introduce support into the nvmem core for arrays of register ranges
that should not result in actual device access. For these regions a
constant byte (repeated) is returned instead on read, and writes are
quietly ignored and returned as successful.
This is useful for instance if certain efuse regions are protected
from access by Linux because they contain secret info to another part
of the system (like an integrated modem).
Signed-off-by: Evan Green <[email protected]>
---
Changes in v2:
- Introduced keepout regions into the core (Srini)
drivers/nvmem/core.c | 95 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++--
include/linux/nvmem-provider.h | 17 ++++++
2 files changed, 108 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/nvmem/core.c b/drivers/nvmem/core.c
index a09ff8409f600..f7819c57f8828 100644
--- a/drivers/nvmem/core.c
+++ b/drivers/nvmem/core.c
@@ -19,6 +19,9 @@
#include <linux/of.h>
#include <linux/slab.h>
+#define MAX(a, b) ((a) > (b) ? (a) : (b))
+#define MIN(a, b) ((a) < (b) ? (a) : (b))
+
struct nvmem_device {
struct module *owner;
struct device dev;
@@ -34,6 +37,8 @@ struct nvmem_device {
struct bin_attribute eeprom;
struct device *base_dev;
struct list_head cells;
+ const struct nvmem_keepout *keepout;
+ unsigned int nkeepout;
nvmem_reg_read_t reg_read;
nvmem_reg_write_t reg_write;
struct gpio_desc *wp_gpio;
@@ -66,8 +71,8 @@ static LIST_HEAD(nvmem_lookup_list);
static BLOCKING_NOTIFIER_HEAD(nvmem_notifier);
-static int nvmem_reg_read(struct nvmem_device *nvmem, unsigned int offset,
- void *val, size_t bytes)
+static int __nvmem_reg_read(struct nvmem_device *nvmem, unsigned int offset,
+ void *val, size_t bytes)
{
if (nvmem->reg_read)
return nvmem->reg_read(nvmem->priv, offset, val, bytes);
@@ -75,8 +80,8 @@ static int nvmem_reg_read(struct nvmem_device *nvmem, unsigned int offset,
return -EINVAL;
}
-static int nvmem_reg_write(struct nvmem_device *nvmem, unsigned int offset,
- void *val, size_t bytes)
+static int __nvmem_reg_write(struct nvmem_device *nvmem, unsigned int offset,
+ void *val, size_t bytes)
{
int ret;
@@ -90,6 +95,86 @@ static int nvmem_reg_write(struct nvmem_device *nvmem, unsigned int offset,
return -EINVAL;
}
+static int nvmem_access_with_keepouts(struct nvmem_device *nvmem,
+ unsigned int offset, void *val,
+ size_t bytes, int write)
+{
+
+ unsigned int end = offset + bytes;
+ unsigned int kend, ksize;
+ const struct nvmem_keepout *keepout = nvmem->keepout;
+ const struct nvmem_keepout *keepoutend = keepout + nvmem->nkeepout;
+ int rc;
+
+ /* Skip everything before the range being accessed */
+ while ((keepout < keepoutend) && (keepout->end <= offset))
+ keepout++;
+
+ while ((offset < end) && (keepout < keepoutend)) {
+
+ /* Access the valid portion before the keepout. */
+ if (offset < keepout->start) {
+ kend = MIN(end, keepout->start);
+ ksize = kend - offset;
+ if (write)
+ rc = __nvmem_reg_write(nvmem, offset, val, ksize);
+ else
+ rc = __nvmem_reg_read(nvmem, offset, val, ksize);
+
+ if (rc)
+ return rc;
+
+ offset += ksize;
+ val += ksize;
+ }
+
+ /*
+ * Now we're aligned to the start of this keepout zone. Go
+ * through it.
+ */
+ kend = MIN(end, keepout->end);
+ ksize = kend - offset;
+ if (!write)
+ memset(val, keepout->value, ksize);
+
+ val += ksize;
+ offset += ksize;
+ keepout++;
+ }
+
+ /*
+ * If we ran out of keepouts but there's still stuff to do, send it
+ * down directly
+ */
+ if (offset < end) {
+ ksize = end - offset;
+ if (write)
+ return __nvmem_reg_write(nvmem, offset, val, ksize);
+ else
+ return __nvmem_reg_read(nvmem, offset, val, ksize);
+ }
+
+ return 0;
+}
+
+static int nvmem_reg_read(struct nvmem_device *nvmem, unsigned int offset,
+ void *val, size_t bytes)
+{
+ if (!nvmem->nkeepout)
+ return __nvmem_reg_read(nvmem, offset, val, bytes);
+
+ return nvmem_access_with_keepouts(nvmem, offset, val, bytes, false);
+}
+
+static int nvmem_reg_write(struct nvmem_device *nvmem, unsigned int offset,
+ void *val, size_t bytes)
+{
+ if (!nvmem->nkeepout)
+ return __nvmem_reg_write(nvmem, offset, val, bytes);
+
+ return nvmem_access_with_keepouts(nvmem, offset, val, bytes, true);
+}
+
#ifdef CONFIG_NVMEM_SYSFS
static const char * const nvmem_type_str[] = {
[NVMEM_TYPE_UNKNOWN] = "Unknown",
@@ -647,6 +732,8 @@ struct nvmem_device *nvmem_register(const struct nvmem_config *config)
nvmem->type = config->type;
nvmem->reg_read = config->reg_read;
nvmem->reg_write = config->reg_write;
+ nvmem->keepout = config->keepout;
+ nvmem->nkeepout = config->nkeepout;
if (!config->no_of_node)
nvmem->dev.of_node = config->dev->of_node;
diff --git a/include/linux/nvmem-provider.h b/include/linux/nvmem-provider.h
index 06409a6c40bcb..e162b757b6d54 100644
--- a/include/linux/nvmem-provider.h
+++ b/include/linux/nvmem-provider.h
@@ -30,6 +30,19 @@ enum nvmem_type {
#define NVMEM_DEVID_NONE (-1)
#define NVMEM_DEVID_AUTO (-2)
+/**
+ * struct nvmem_keepout - NVMEM register keepout range.
+ *
+ * @start: The first byte offset to avoid.
+ * @end: One beyond the last byte offset to avoid.
+ * @value: The byte to fill reads with for this region.
+ */
+struct nvmem_keepout {
+ unsigned int start;
+ unsigned int end;
+ unsigned char value;
+};
+
/**
* struct nvmem_config - NVMEM device configuration
*
@@ -39,6 +52,8 @@ enum nvmem_type {
* @owner: Pointer to exporter module. Used for refcounting.
* @cells: Optional array of pre-defined NVMEM cells.
* @ncells: Number of elements in cells.
+ * @keepout: Optional array of keepout ranges (sorted ascending by start).
+ * @nkeepout: Number of elements in the keepout array.
* @type: Type of the nvmem storage
* @read_only: Device is read-only.
* @root_only: Device is accessibly to root only.
@@ -66,6 +81,8 @@ struct nvmem_config {
struct gpio_desc *wp_gpio;
const struct nvmem_cell_info *cells;
int ncells;
+ const struct nvmem_keepout *keepout;
+ unsigned int nkeepout;
enum nvmem_type type;
bool read_only;
bool root_only;
--
2.26.2
Hi,
On Fri, Oct 16, 2020 at 12:27 PM Evan Green <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> Introduce support into the nvmem core for arrays of register ranges
> that should not result in actual device access. For these regions a
> constant byte (repeated) is returned instead on read, and writes are
> quietly ignored and returned as successful.
>
> This is useful for instance if certain efuse regions are protected
> from access by Linux because they contain secret info to another part
> of the system (like an integrated modem).
>
> Signed-off-by: Evan Green <[email protected]>
> ---
>
> Changes in v2:
> - Introduced keepout regions into the core (Srini)
>
> drivers/nvmem/core.c | 95 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++--
> include/linux/nvmem-provider.h | 17 ++++++
> 2 files changed, 108 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/nvmem/core.c b/drivers/nvmem/core.c
> index a09ff8409f600..f7819c57f8828 100644
> --- a/drivers/nvmem/core.c
> +++ b/drivers/nvmem/core.c
> @@ -19,6 +19,9 @@
> #include <linux/of.h>
> #include <linux/slab.h>
>
> +#define MAX(a, b) ((a) > (b) ? (a) : (b))
> +#define MIN(a, b) ((a) < (b) ? (a) : (b))
Why not use min() / max() macros from include/linux/kernel.h?
> +static int nvmem_access_with_keepouts(struct nvmem_device *nvmem,
> + unsigned int offset, void *val,
> + size_t bytes, int write)
> +{
> +
> + unsigned int end = offset + bytes;
> + unsigned int kend, ksize;
> + const struct nvmem_keepout *keepout = nvmem->keepout;
> + const struct nvmem_keepout *keepoutend = keepout + nvmem->nkeepout;
> + int rc;
> +
> + /* Skip everything before the range being accessed */
nit: "Skip everything" => "Skip all keepouts"
...might not hurt to remind here that keepouts are sorted?
> + while ((keepout < keepoutend) && (keepout->end <= offset))
> + keepout++;
> +
> + while ((offset < end) && (keepout < keepoutend)) {
> +
nit: remove blank line?
> @@ -647,6 +732,8 @@ struct nvmem_device *nvmem_register(const struct nvmem_config *config)
> nvmem->type = config->type;
> nvmem->reg_read = config->reg_read;
> nvmem->reg_write = config->reg_write;
> + nvmem->keepout = config->keepout;
> + nvmem->nkeepout = config->nkeepout;
It seems like it might be worth adding something to validate that the
ranges are sorted and return an error if they're not.
Maybe worth validating (and documenting) that the keepouts won't cause
us to violate "stride" and/or "word_size" ?
Everything above is just nits and other than them this looks like a
nice change. BTW: this is the kind of thing that screams for unit
testing, though that might be a bit too much of a yak to shave here?
-Doug
On Wed, Oct 21, 2020 at 2:41 PM Doug Anderson <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> On Fri, Oct 16, 2020 at 12:27 PM Evan Green <[email protected]> wrote:
> >
> > Introduce support into the nvmem core for arrays of register ranges
> > that should not result in actual device access. For these regions a
> > constant byte (repeated) is returned instead on read, and writes are
> > quietly ignored and returned as successful.
> >
> > This is useful for instance if certain efuse regions are protected
> > from access by Linux because they contain secret info to another part
> > of the system (like an integrated modem).
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Evan Green <[email protected]>
> > ---
> >
> > Changes in v2:
> > - Introduced keepout regions into the core (Srini)
> >
> > drivers/nvmem/core.c | 95 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++--
> > include/linux/nvmem-provider.h | 17 ++++++
> > 2 files changed, 108 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/nvmem/core.c b/drivers/nvmem/core.c
> > index a09ff8409f600..f7819c57f8828 100644
> > --- a/drivers/nvmem/core.c
> > +++ b/drivers/nvmem/core.c
> > @@ -19,6 +19,9 @@
> > #include <linux/of.h>
> > #include <linux/slab.h>
> >
> > +#define MAX(a, b) ((a) > (b) ? (a) : (b))
> > +#define MIN(a, b) ((a) < (b) ? (a) : (b))
>
> Why not use min() / max() macros from include/linux/kernel.h?
>
Done
>
> > +static int nvmem_access_with_keepouts(struct nvmem_device *nvmem,
> > + unsigned int offset, void *val,
> > + size_t bytes, int write)
> > +{
> > +
> > + unsigned int end = offset + bytes;
> > + unsigned int kend, ksize;
> > + const struct nvmem_keepout *keepout = nvmem->keepout;
> > + const struct nvmem_keepout *keepoutend = keepout + nvmem->nkeepout;
> > + int rc;
> > +
> > + /* Skip everything before the range being accessed */
>
> nit: "Skip everything" => "Skip all keepouts"
>
> ...might not hurt to remind here that keepouts are sorted?
Done
>
>
> > + while ((keepout < keepoutend) && (keepout->end <= offset))
> > + keepout++;
> > +
> > + while ((offset < end) && (keepout < keepoutend)) {
> > +
>
> nit: remove blank line?
Done
>
>
> > @@ -647,6 +732,8 @@ struct nvmem_device *nvmem_register(const struct nvmem_config *config)
> > nvmem->type = config->type;
> > nvmem->reg_read = config->reg_read;
> > nvmem->reg_write = config->reg_write;
> > + nvmem->keepout = config->keepout;
> > + nvmem->nkeepout = config->nkeepout;
>
> It seems like it might be worth adding something to validate that the
> ranges are sorted and return an error if they're not.
>
> Maybe worth validating (and documenting) that the keepouts won't cause
> us to violate "stride" and/or "word_size" ?
Done
>
>
> Everything above is just nits and other than them this looks like a
> nice change. BTW: this is the kind of thing that screams for unit
> testing, though that might be a bit too much of a yak to shave here?
It would be cool, but I'll leave that for another time. Thanks for the
review, Doug!
>
> -Doug