lists.openwall.net   lists  /  announce  owl-users  owl-dev  john-users  john-dev  passwdqc-users  yescrypt  popa3d-users  /  oss-security  kernel-hardening  musl  sabotage  tlsify  passwords  /  crypt-dev  xvendor  /  Bugtraq  Full-Disclosure  linux-kernel  linux-netdev  linux-ext4  linux-hardening  linux-cve-announce  PHC 
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
 
Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.
[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date:	Fri, 28 Aug 2009 12:59:16 -0700
From:	Chris Wright <chrisw@...s-sol.org>
To:	Matthew Wilcox <matthew@....cx>
Cc:	Chris Wright <chrisw@...s-sol.org>,
	Jesse Barnes <jbarnes@...tuousgeek.org>,
	Ivan Kokshaysky <ink@...assic.park.msu.ru>,
	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Yu Zhao <yu.zhao@...el.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-pci@...r.kernel.org, stable@...nel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] SR-IOV: correct broken resource alignment calculations

* Matthew Wilcox (matthew@....cx) wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 28, 2009 at 12:17:14PM -0700, Chris Wright wrote:
> > An SR-IOV capable device includes an SR-IOV PCIe capability which
> > describes the Virtual Function (VF) BAR requirements.  A typical SR-IOV
> > device can support multiple VFs whose BARs must be in a contiguous region,
> > effectively an array of VF BARs.  The BAR reports the size requirement
> > for a single VF.  We calculate the full range needed by simply multiplying
> > the VF BAR size with the number of possible VFs and create a resource
> > spanning the full range.
> > 
> > This all seems sane enough except it artificially inflates the alignment
> > requirement for the VF BAR.  The VF BAR need only be aligned to the size
> > of a single BAR not the contiguous range of VF BARs.  This can cause us
> > to fail to allocate resources for the BAR despite the fact that we
> > actually have enough space.
> > 
> > This patch adds a support for a new resource alignment type,
> > IORESOURCE_VSIZEALIGN, and allows struct resource to keep track of the
> > size requirements of a VF BAR which are smaller than the full resource
> > size.  This could also be done all within the PCI layer w/out bloating
> > struct resource or using the last available bit for alignment types.
> 
> Yes, I think that would be preferable.  We have a *LOT* of resources in
> the kernel, and the embedded folks would not find it funny if they all
> grew in size suddenly.

OK, I'll send that momentarily.  It has one downside which is we re-read
the BAR size multiple times.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ