linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] PCI: set correct value for iov device before device

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:	Thu, 30 May 2013 17:22:17 -0600
From:	Bjorn Helgaas <bhelgaas@...gle.com>
To:	Yinghai Lu <yinghai@...nel.org>
Cc:	"linux-pci@...r.kernel.org" <linux-pci@...r.kernel.org>,
	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Xudong Hao <xudong.hao@...el.com>,
	Jiang Liu <jiang.liu@...wei.com>,
	Yijing Wang <wangyijing@...wei.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] PCI: set correct value for iov device before device

On Thu, May 30, 2013 at 2:27 PM, Yinghai Lu <yinghai@...nel.org> wrote:
> On Wed, May 29, 2013 at 11:04 PM, Yinghai Lu <yinghai@...nel.org> wrote:
>> On Wed, May 29, 2013 at 10:45 PM, Xudong Hao <xudong.hao@...el.com> wrote:
>>> Since device registering is put into pci_device_add(), it must set value of
>>> Virtual Function device's member before the pci_dev is put to device tree. Or
>>> some relevant subsystem of driver model such as xen will report a incorrect
>>> IOV device to Xen hypervior.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Xudong Hao <xudong.hao@...el.com>
>>> ---
>>>  drivers/pci/iov.c | 6 +++---
>>>  1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/drivers/pci/iov.c b/drivers/pci/iov.c
>>> index c93071d..43d3de9 100644
>>> --- a/drivers/pci/iov.c
>>> +++ b/drivers/pci/iov.c
>>> @@ -110,12 +110,12 @@ static int virtfn_add(struct pci_dev *dev, int id, int reset)
>>>         if (reset)
>>>                 __pci_reset_function(virtfn);
>>>
>>> -       pci_device_add(virtfn, virtfn->bus);
>>> -       mutex_unlock(&iov->dev->sriov->lock);
>>> -
>>>         virtfn->physfn = pci_dev_get(dev);
>>>         virtfn->is_virtfn = 1;
>>>
>>> +       pci_device_add(virtfn, virtfn->bus);
>>> +       mutex_unlock(&iov->dev->sriov->lock);
>>> +
>>>         rc = pci_bus_add_device(virtfn);
>>>         sprintf(buf, "virtfn%u", id);
>>>         rc = sysfs_create_link(&dev->dev.kobj, &virtfn->dev.kobj, buf);
>>
>> I have similar patch at
>> https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/2562551/
>>    [5/7] PCI, ACPI: Don't glue ACPI dev with pci VFs
>>
>> and Jiang has another one
>> https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/2613481/
>>    [v3,part1,10/10] PCI, IOV: hide remove and rescan sysfs interfaces
>> for SR-IOV virtual functions
>
> Bjorn,
>
> I double check this one, we should split the patch from me or Jiang.

I don't know what the sentence above means.

> and the one about set virtfn=1 should be -stable material.

I assume you mean that Jiang's "[v3,part1,10/10] PCI, IOV: hide remove
and rescan sysfs interfaces for SR-IOV virtual functions" patch does
not need to be in v3.10, but it should be marked for -stable.

How far back should it go?  v3.9+?

> That will address another problem that is caused by
> moving device_add from pci_bus_add_device to pci_device_add.

I assume you're talking about a problem caused by 4f535093 ("PCI: Put
pci_dev in device tree as early as possible").  That commit appeared
in v3.9.

If we're asking to add the "hide remove and rescan sysfs interfaces"
patch to the v3.9 stable series, we should have a description of
exactly what problem it fixes, and ideally, a bugzilla for it.  Can
you provide that?

That patch appears to be the only one in the [v3,part1,0/10] series
that actually directly fixes an issue, so it would be nice to have
more specifics in that changelog to begin with.  The other patches in
that series appear to to be cleanups and preparation for the real
fixes that will come later.

Bjorn
--
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/