[PATCH v3 10/15] ACPI: CPPC: Reject reads and RMW of write-only controls

Christian Loehle <[email protected]>
Newsgroups org.kernel.vger.linux-pm,org.kernel.vger.linux-acpi,org.kernel.vger.linux-kernel
Message-ID <[email protected]>
Between _CPC revision 3 and revision 4, Desired Performance changed from
Read/Write to Write. Revision 4 also added the write-only OSPM Nominal
Performance control. ACPI 6.6 section 4.6.3 says reads of write-only bit
positions produce undefined results.

The public Desired Performance helper already rejects revision-4 readback,
but the common register accessor still permits either write-only control to
be read. Reject both centrally so new callers cannot bypass the revision
rule.

A partial SystemMemory field would also make cpc_write() read its complete
access unit to preserve bits outside the field. Reject revision-4
descriptions of either write-only control when their geometry requires RMW.
A full-width description remains supported and is written without a
preceding read.

Mark an inaccessible OSPM Nominal Performance control unsupported because
it is optional. Do the same for inaccessible Desired Performance while
parsing, then let the post-parse control check accept it only for immutable
autonomous selection. This preserves the autonomous-only exception without
accepting an unusable Desired control in non-autonomous mode.

Fixes: 71e1815113f7 ("ACPI: CPPC: Add support for CPPC v4")
Reported-by: Sashiko <[email protected]>
Link: https://sashiko.dev/#/patchset/20260807111303.1062391-1-christian.loehle%40arm.com
Link: https://sashiko.dev/#/patchset/20260808082644.1251332-1-christian.loehle%40arm.com
Signed-off-by: Christian Loehle <[email protected]>
---
 drivers/acpi/cppc_acpi.c | 39 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+)

diff --git a/drivers/acpi/cppc_acpi.c b/drivers/acpi/cppc_acpi.c
index 8967ffdac76f..26e4c83dc2df 100644
--- a/drivers/acpi/cppc_acpi.c
+++ b/drivers/acpi/cppc_acpi.c
@@ -333,6 +333,21 @@ static bool cpc_reg_is_writable(unsigned int reg_idx)
 	}
 }
 
+static bool cpc_reg_is_write_only(const struct cpc_desc *cpc_desc,
+				  unsigned int reg_idx)
+{
+	return cpc_desc->version >= CPPC_V4_REV &&
+	       (reg_idx == DESIRED_PERF || reg_idx == OSPM_NOMINAL_PERF);
+}
+
+static void cpc_disable_reg(struct cpc_desc *cpc_desc, unsigned int reg_idx)
+{
+	struct cpc_register_resource *reg = &cpc_desc->cpc_regs[reg_idx];
+
+	reg->type = ACPI_TYPE_INTEGER;
+	reg->cpc_entry.int_value = 0;
+}
+
 static bool cpc_sysmem_reg_needs_rmw(const struct cpc_register_resource *reg)
 {
 	const struct cpc_reg *gas = &reg->cpc_entry.reg;
@@ -363,6 +378,17 @@ static int cpc_validate_sysmem_reg(const struct cpc_desc *cpc_desc,
 	if (gas->address & (access_size - 1))
 		goto invalid;
 
+	if (cpc_reg_is_write_only(cpc_desc, reg_idx) &&
+	    (gas->bit_offset || gas->bit_width != access_width)) {
+		const char *name = reg_idx == DESIRED_PERF ?
+				   "Desired Performance" :
+				   "OSPM Nominal Performance";
+
+		pr_err("CPU%d: _CPC v%d %s register requires unsupported read-modify-write\n",
+		       cpc_desc->cpu_id, cpc_desc->version, name);
+		return -EINVAL;
+	}
+
 	return 0;
 
 invalid:
@@ -1291,6 +1317,17 @@ int acpi_cppc_processor_probe(struct acpi_processor *pr)
 					size_t access_width;
 
 					err = cpc_validate_sysmem_reg(cpc_ptr, gas_t, i - 2);
+					if (err && (i - 2 == DESIRED_PERF ||
+						    i - 2 == OSPM_NOMINAL_PERF)) {
+						const char *name = i - 2 == DESIRED_PERF ?
+								   "Desired Performance" :
+								   "OSPM Nominal Performance";
+
+						pr_warn("CPU%d: disabling inaccessible %s register\n",
+							pr->id, name);
+						cpc_disable_reg(cpc_ptr, i - 2);
+						continue;
+					}
 					if (err) {
 						ret = err;
 						goto out_free;
@@ -1759,6 +1796,8 @@ static int cppc_get_reg_val(int cpu, enum cppc_regs reg_idx, u64 *val)
 		pr_debug("No CPC descriptor for CPU:%d\n", cpu);
 		return -ENODEV;
 	}
+	if (cpc_reg_is_write_only(cpc_desc, reg_idx))
+		return -EOPNOTSUPP;
 
 	reg = &cpc_desc->cpc_regs[reg_idx];
 
-- 
2.34.1
lmpx.com only provides a reader for public news (NNTP) servers. It is not affiliated with the servers or forums shown here and is not responsible for the content of articles, which is written by their respective authors.