Hi,
The specification lists a number of commands that have responses:
The operation of a virtio RPMB device is driven by the requests placed
on the virtqueue. The type of request can be program key
(VIRTIO_RPMB_REQ_PROGRAM_KEY), get write counter
(VIRTIO_RPMB_REQ_GET_WRITE_COUNTER), write
(VIRTIO_RPMB_REQ_DATA_WRITE), and read (VIRTIO_RPMB_REQ_DATA_READ). A
program key or write request can also combine with a result read
(VIRTIO_RPMB_REQ_RESULT_READ) for a returned result.
Now I'm deep in the guts of virt queues doing the implementation I'm
trying to clarify exactly what frames should be sent to the device and
if they should be out_sgs or in_sgs. I suspect there is some difference
between the original prototype interface and what we have now.
Some operations obviously have an implied response
(VIRTIO_RPMB_REQ_GET_WRITE_COUNTER and VIRTIO_RPMB_REQ_DATA_READ). As
far as I could tell the frame should be simple:
sg[0] (out_sg=1) - frame with command
sg[1..n] (in_sg=1..n) - space for the reply to be filled in by the device
However the language for the program key and data write say they can be
combined with a VIRTIO_RPMB_REQ_RESULT_READ to optionally return a
result. My question is is this result read meant to be in a separate
request frame and response frame so you get:
sg[0] - VIRTIO_RPMB_REQ_PROGRAM_KEY/VIRTIO_RPMB_REQ_DATA_WRITE frame
sg[1] - VIRTIO_RPMB_REQ_RESULT_READ (out_sg=2)
sg[2] - empty frame for response (in_sg=1)
or:
sg[0] - VIRTIO_RPMB_REQ_PROGRAM_KEY/VIRTIO_RPMB_REQ_DATA_WRITE frame (out_sg=1)
sg[1] - VIRTIO_RPMB_REQ_RESULT_READ (in_sg=1)
where the result frame is filled in and sent back?
I must say I'm a little confused by the logic in rpmb_ioctl (in the
userspace tool) which creates both out_frames and resp frames:
static int rpmb_ioctl(uint8_t frame_type, int fd, uint16_t req,
const void *frames_in, unsigned int cnt_in,
void *frames_out, unsigned int cnt_out)
{
int ret;
struct __packed {
struct rpmb_ioc_seq_cmd h;
struct rpmb_ioc_cmd cmd[3];
} iseq = {};
void *frame_res = NULL;
int i;
uint32_t flags;
rpmb_dbg("RPMB OP: %s\n", rpmb_op_str(req));
dbg_dump_frame(frame_type, "In Frame: ", frames_in, cnt_in);
i = 0;
flags = RPMB_F_WRITE;
if (req == RPMB_WRITE_DATA || req == RPMB_PROGRAM_KEY)
flags |= RPMB_F_REL_WRITE;
rpmb_ioc_cmd_set(iseq.cmd[i], flags, frames_in, cnt_in);
i++;
if (req == RPMB_WRITE_DATA || req == RPMB_PROGRAM_KEY) {
frame_res = rpmb_frame_alloc(frame_type, 0);
if (!frame_res)
return -ENOMEM;
rpmb_frame_set(frame_type, frame_res,
RPMB_RESULT_READ, 0, 0, 0);
rpmb_ioc_cmd_set(iseq.cmd[i], RPMB_F_WRITE, frame_res, 0);
i++;
}
rpmb_ioc_cmd_set(iseq.cmd[i], 0, frames_out, cnt_out);
i++;
iseq.h.num_of_cmds = i;
ret = ioctl(fd, RPMB_IOC_SEQ_CMD, &iseq);
if (ret < 0)
rpmb_err("ioctl failure %d: %s.\n", ret,
strerror(errno));
ret = rpmb_check_req_resp(frame_type, req, frames_out);
dbg_dump_frame(frame_type, "Res Frame: ", frame_res, 1);
dbg_dump_frame(frame_type, "Out Frame: ", frames_out,
cnt_out);
free(frame_res);
return ret;
}
although I'm guessing this might just be an impedance between the
chardev ioctl interface for rpmb and the virtio FE driver which is only
one potential consumer of these rpmb ioc commands?
Can anyone clarify?
--
Alex Benn?e
Alex Benn?e <alex.bennee at linaro.org> writes:> Hi, > > The specification lists a number of commands that have responses: > > The operation of a virtio RPMB device is driven by the requests placed > on the virtqueue. The type of request can be program key > (VIRTIO_RPMB_REQ_PROGRAM_KEY), get write counter > (VIRTIO_RPMB_REQ_GET_WRITE_COUNTER), write > (VIRTIO_RPMB_REQ_DATA_WRITE), and read (VIRTIO_RPMB_REQ_DATA_READ). A > program key or write request can also combine with a result read > (VIRTIO_RPMB_REQ_RESULT_READ) for a returned result. > > Now I'm deep in the guts of virt queues doing the implementation I'm > trying to clarify exactly what frames should be sent to the device and > if they should be out_sgs or in_sgs. I suspect there is some difference > between the original prototype interface and what we have now. > > Some operations obviously have an implied response > (VIRTIO_RPMB_REQ_GET_WRITE_COUNTER and VIRTIO_RPMB_REQ_DATA_READ). As > far as I could tell the frame should be simple: > > sg[0] (out_sg=1) - frame with command > sg[1..n] (in_sg=1..n) - space for the reply to be filled in by the device > > However the language for the program key and data write say they can be > combined with a VIRTIO_RPMB_REQ_RESULT_READ to optionally return a > result. My question is is this result read meant to be in a separate > request frame and response frame so you get: > > sg[0] - VIRTIO_RPMB_REQ_PROGRAM_KEY/VIRTIO_RPMB_REQ_DATA_WRITE frame > sg[1] - VIRTIO_RPMB_REQ_RESULT_READ (out_sg=2) > sg[2] - empty frame for response (in_sg=1) > > or: > > sg[0] - VIRTIO_RPMB_REQ_PROGRAM_KEY/VIRTIO_RPMB_REQ_DATA_WRITE frame (out_sg=1) > sg[1] - VIRTIO_RPMB_REQ_RESULT_READ (in_sg=1) > > where the result frame is filled in and sent back? > > I must say I'm a little confused by the logic in rpmb_ioctl (in the > userspace tool) which creates both out_frames and resp frames: > > static int rpmb_ioctl(uint8_t frame_type, int fd, uint16_t req, > const void *frames_in, unsigned int cnt_in, > void *frames_out, unsigned int cnt_out) > { > int ret; > struct __packed { > struct rpmb_ioc_seq_cmd h; > struct rpmb_ioc_cmd cmd[3]; > } iseq = {}; > > void *frame_res = NULL; > int i; > uint32_t flags; > > rpmb_dbg("RPMB OP: %s\n", rpmb_op_str(req)); > dbg_dump_frame(frame_type, "In Frame: ", frames_in, cnt_in); > > i = 0; > flags = RPMB_F_WRITE; > if (req == RPMB_WRITE_DATA || req == RPMB_PROGRAM_KEY) > flags |= RPMB_F_REL_WRITE; > rpmb_ioc_cmd_set(iseq.cmd[i], flags, frames_in, cnt_in); > i++; > > if (req == RPMB_WRITE_DATA || req == RPMB_PROGRAM_KEY) { > frame_res = rpmb_frame_alloc(frame_type, 0); > if (!frame_res) > return -ENOMEM; > rpmb_frame_set(frame_type, frame_res, > RPMB_RESULT_READ, 0, 0, 0); > rpmb_ioc_cmd_set(iseq.cmd[i], RPMB_F_WRITE, frame_res, 0); > i++; > } > > rpmb_ioc_cmd_set(iseq.cmd[i], 0, frames_out, cnt_out); > i++; > > iseq.h.num_of_cmds = i; > ret = ioctl(fd, RPMB_IOC_SEQ_CMD, &iseq); > if (ret < 0) > rpmb_err("ioctl failure %d: %s.\n", ret, strerror(errno)); > > ret = rpmb_check_req_resp(frame_type, req, frames_out); > > dbg_dump_frame(frame_type, "Res Frame: ", frame_res, 1); > dbg_dump_frame(frame_type, "Out Frame: ", frames_out, cnt_out); > free(frame_res); > return ret; > } > > although I'm guessing this might just be an impedance between the > chardev ioctl interface for rpmb and the virtio FE driver which is only > one potential consumer of these rpmb ioc commands? > > Can anyone clarify?Ping? -- Alex Benn?e
Alex Bennée
2020-Sep-11 16:44 UTC
[virtio-dev] Re: clarifying the handling of responses for virtio-rpmb
Harald Mommer <hmo at opensynergy.com> writes:> Hello, > > I had my hands in a virtio RPMB device implementation the last few > weeks. During the development process I had to apply some patches to the > virtio RPMB driver: > > * Change the device id from 0xFFFF to 28 > > * (Add some debug facilities. Needed to see the frames. Got first no > request frames on the device side, nothing.) > > * Fix descriptor directions. For the outgoing frames num_in was > incremented instead of num_out. > > The frames in the for-loop may be outgoing or intended for incoming > data. Decided on the RPMB_F_WRITE flag what to do with those frames: > > for (i = 0; i < ncmds; i++) { > ... > > if (cmds[i].flags & RPMB_F_WRITE) > sgs[num_out++ + num_in] = &frame[i]; > else > sgs[num_out + num_in++] = &frame[i]; > } > > * Got now too much data comparing to the virtio spec. Removed those > additional frames in the beginning disabling some pieces of code in > the virtio RPMB driver. > > You are probably puzzled by something which I think is a bug in the > virtio RPMB driver regarding the descriptor directions. Could be that > some device implementations do not really care about provided descriptor > directions, in this case this may go unnoticed for a while.I wonder if we've ended up making very similar changes to the virtio driver? I suspect because the originally driver had a whole bunch of command frames for something that never made it into the final spec. FWIW my current hacked up tree is here: https://git.linaro.org/people/alex.bennee/linux.git/log/?h=testing/ivshmem-and-rpm-aug2020 I was pondering if it was worth removing the file-system integration patches and just posting a series which implements the rpmb char device, userspace tool and the virtio-rpmb driver?> > > Am 10.09.20 um 15:08 schrieb Alex Benn?e: >> CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. >> Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. >> >> >> Alex Benn?e <alex.bennee at linaro.org> writes: >> >>> Hi, >>> >>> The specification lists a number of commands that have responses: >>> >>> The operation of a virtio RPMB device is driven by the requests placed >>> on the virtqueue. The type of request can be program key >>> (VIRTIO_RPMB_REQ_PROGRAM_KEY), get write counter >>> (VIRTIO_RPMB_REQ_GET_WRITE_COUNTER), write >>> (VIRTIO_RPMB_REQ_DATA_WRITE), and read (VIRTIO_RPMB_REQ_DATA_READ). A >>> program key or write request can also combine with a result read >>> (VIRTIO_RPMB_REQ_RESULT_READ) for a returned result. >>> >>> Now I'm deep in the guts of virt queues doing the implementation I'm >>> trying to clarify exactly what frames should be sent to the device and >>> if they should be out_sgs or in_sgs. I suspect there is some difference >>> between the original prototype interface and what we have now. >>> >>> Some operations obviously have an implied response >>> (VIRTIO_RPMB_REQ_GET_WRITE_COUNTER and VIRTIO_RPMB_REQ_DATA_READ). As >>> far as I could tell the frame should be simple: >>> >>> sg[0] (out_sg=1) - frame with command >>> sg[1..n] (in_sg=1..n) - space for the reply to be filled in by the device >>> >>> However the language for the program key and data write say they can be >>> combined with a VIRTIO_RPMB_REQ_RESULT_READ to optionally return a >>> result. My question is is this result read meant to be in a separate >>> request frame and response frame so you get: >>> >>> sg[0] - VIRTIO_RPMB_REQ_PROGRAM_KEY/VIRTIO_RPMB_REQ_DATA_WRITE frame >>> sg[1] - VIRTIO_RPMB_REQ_RESULT_READ (out_sg=2) >>> sg[2] - empty frame for response (in_sg=1) > This is what works after applying the direction patch above in the > virtio driver and which makes also sense to me. See also below my > comment for the rpmb_ioctl() code. >>> >>> or: >>> >>> sg[0] - VIRTIO_RPMB_REQ_PROGRAM_KEY/VIRTIO_RPMB_REQ_DATA_WRITE frame (out_sg=1) >>> sg[1] - VIRTIO_RPMB_REQ_RESULT_READ (in_sg=1) > Makes no sense for me. The VIRTIO_RPMB_REQ_RESULT_READ is a request > (command) in the same way as the other requests. >>> >>> where the result frame is filled in and sent back? >>> >>> I must say I'm a little confused by the logic in rpmb_ioctl (in the >>> userspace tool) which creates both out_frames and resp frames: > > Was also confused but it's not that complicated (after some hours). For > REQ_PROGRAM_KEY/REQ_WRITE_DATA is always an additional REQ_RESULT_READ > added. So in the end as last descriptor there is always an incoming > frame to be filled either with the RESULT_READ data or the response > data for REQ_GET_WRITE_COUNTER/REQ_DATA_READ. > >>> static int rpmb_ioctl(uint8_t frame_type, int fd, uint16_t req, >>> const void *frames_in, unsigned int cnt_in, >>> void *frames_out, unsigned int cnt_out) >>> { >>> int ret; >>> struct __packed { >>> struct rpmb_ioc_seq_cmd h; >>> struct rpmb_ioc_cmd cmd[3]; >>> } iseq = {}; >>> >>> void *frame_res = NULL; >>> int i; >>> uint32_t flags; >>> >>> rpmb_dbg("RPMB OP: %s\n", rpmb_op_str(req)); >>> dbg_dump_frame(frame_type, "In Frame: ", frames_in, cnt_in); >>> >>> i = 0; >>> flags = RPMB_F_WRITE; >>> if (req == RPMB_WRITE_DATA || req == RPMB_PROGRAM_KEY) >>> flags |= RPMB_F_REL_WRITE; >>> rpmb_ioc_cmd_set(iseq.cmd[i], flags, frames_in, cnt_in); >>> i++; >>> >>> if (req == RPMB_WRITE_DATA || req == RPMB_PROGRAM_KEY) { >>> frame_res = rpmb_frame_alloc(frame_type, 0); >>> if (!frame_res) >>> return -ENOMEM; >>> rpmb_frame_set(frame_type, frame_res, >>> RPMB_RESULT_READ, 0, 0, 0); >>> rpmb_ioc_cmd_set(iseq.cmd[i], RPMB_F_WRITE, frame_res, 0); >>> i++; >>> } >>> >>> rpmb_ioc_cmd_set(iseq.cmd[i], 0, frames_out, cnt_out); >>> i++; >>> >>> iseq.h.num_of_cmds = i; >>> ret = ioctl(fd, RPMB_IOC_SEQ_CMD, &iseq); >>> if (ret < 0) >>> rpmb_err("ioctl failure %d: %s.\n", ret, strerror(errno)); >>> >>> ret = rpmb_check_req_resp(frame_type, req, frames_out); >>> >>> dbg_dump_frame(frame_type, "Res Frame: ", frame_res, 1); >>> dbg_dump_frame(frame_type, "Out Frame: ", frames_out, cnt_out); >>> free(frame_res); >>> return ret; >>> } >>> >>> although I'm guessing this might just be an impedance between the >>> chardev ioctl interface for rpmb and the virtio FE driver which is only >>> one potential consumer of these rpmb ioc commands? >>> >>> Can anyone clarify? >> Ping? >> >> -- >> Alex Benn?e >> >> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: virtio-dev-unsubscribe at lists.oasis-open.org >> For additional commands, e-mail: virtio-dev-help at lists.oasis-open.org >> >>-- Alex Benn?e