netdev - Re: [PATCH 2/2]: e1000: avoid lockup durig error recovery

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:	Wed, 7 Nov 2007 17:21:19 -0600
From:	linas@...tin.ibm.com (Linas Vepstas)
To:	"Kok, Auke" <auke-jan.h.kok@...el.com>
Cc:	wenxiong@...ibm.com, e1000-devel@...ts.sourceforge.net,
	"Brandeburg, Jesse" <jesse.brandeburg@...el.com>,
	john.ronciak@...el.com, jeffrey.t.kirsher@...el.com,
	Jeff Garzik <jeff@...zik.org>, NetDev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
	"'Stephen Hemminger'" <shemminger@...ux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2]: e1000: avoid lockup durig error recovery

On Wed, Nov 07, 2007 at 02:45:18PM -0800, Kok, Auke wrote:
> [adding netdev, jeff G to the Cc]
> 
> Linas Vepstas wrote:
> > On Wed, Nov 07, 2007 at 01:50:17PM -0800, Kok, Auke wrote:
> >> Linas Vepstas wrote:
> >>> If a PCI bus error is encountered during device open, the
> >>> error recovery routines will attempt to close the device.
> >>> If napi has not yet been enabled, the napi disable in the
> >>> close will hang. 
> >>>
> >>> Signed-off-by: Linas Vepstas <linas@...tin.ibm.com>
> >>>
> >>> ----
> >>> The "elegence" of this solution is arguable: one could
> >>> say its "better" to perform this check in e1000_down().
> >>> However, doing so will disrupt a commonly used path,
> >>> whereas here, the hack is in the infrequently used
> >>> error path, and thus less intrusive. 
> >>>
> >>>  drivers/net/e1000/e1000_main.c |    9 ++++++++-
> >>>  1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> >>>
> >> I think this is OK, but it's quite awful looking if you ask me.
> > 
> > Yeah, ... 
> > 
> > There are several alternatives: below are two. If you
> > find one to be more appealing.. could you use it? Consider them
> > to be "signed-off-by"; I have not actually compiled or tested
> > either of them.
> 
> I'm not a particular fan of putting extra state tracking in the driver for
> something we could extract from the napi subsystem already.
> 
> Jeff, Stephen, can't we have a generic napi_enabled() inline in netdevice.h that
> tests for NAPI_STATE_SCHED ?

Like this?

 include/linux/netdevice.h |   12 ++++++++++++
 1 file changed, 12 insertions(+)

Index: linux-2.6.23-rc8-mm1/include/linux/netdevice.h
===================================================================
--- linux-2.6.23-rc8-mm1.orig/include/linux/netdevice.h	2007-09-26 15:07:05.000000000 -0500
+++ linux-2.6.23-rc8-mm1/include/linux/netdevice.h	2007-11-07 17:14:50.000000000 -0600
@@ -384,6 +384,18 @@ static inline void napi_enable(struct na
 	clear_bit(NAPI_STATE_SCHED, &n->state);
 }
 
+/**
+ *	napi_enabled_p - return non-zero if napi enabled
+ *	@n: napi context
+ * 
+ * Mnemonic: _p stands for "predicate", returning a yes/no
+ * answer to the question.
+ */
+static inline int napi_enabled_p(struct napi_struct *n)
+{
+	return !test_bit(NAPI_STATE_SCHED, &n->state);
+}
+
 /*
  *	The DEVICE structure.
  *	Actually, this whole structure is a big mistake.  It mixes I/O


> I wonder if there isn't something in the PCI error recovery missing the point and
> we can solve this problem better for all drivers somehow.

Well, there's also scsi, which doesn't use napi :-)
For the most part, error recovery is a fairly cut-n-paste
set of steps. However, I don't quite have enough confidence
to say "yea verily, all network adapters will use these 
same steps."

--linas
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html