| 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
| ||
|
Date: Fri, 06 Jan 2017 15:35:57 -0800
From: Greg <gvrose8192@...il.com>
To: "Tantilov, Emil S" <emil.s.tantilov@...el.com>
Cc: "linux-pci@...r.kernel.org" <linux-pci@...r.kernel.org>,
"intel-wired-lan@...ts.osuosl.org" <intel-wired-lan@...ts.osuosl.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"netdev@...r.kernel.org" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
Gavin Shan <gwshan@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
Subject: Re: [Intel-wired-lan] [PATCH v2] PCI: lock each enable/disable
num_vfs operation in sysfs
On Fri, 2017-01-06 at 23:28 +0000, Tantilov, Emil S wrote:
> >-----Original Message-----
> >From: Intel-wired-lan [mailto:intel-wired-lan-bounces@...ts.osuosl.org] On
> >Behalf Of Greg
> >Sent: Friday, January 06, 2017 3:18 PM
> >To: Tantilov, Emil S <emil.s.tantilov@...el.com>
> >Cc: linux-pci@...r.kernel.org; intel-wired-lan@...ts.osuosl.org; linux-
> >kernel@...r.kernel.org; netdev@...r.kernel.org
> >Subject: Re: [Intel-wired-lan] [PATCH v2] PCI: lock each enable/disable
> >num_vfs operation in sysfs
> >
> >On Fri, 2017-01-06 at 13:59 -0800, Emil Tantilov wrote:
> >> Enabling/disabling SRIOV via sysfs by echo-ing multiple values
> >> simultaneously:
> >>
> >> echo 63 > /sys/class/net/ethX/device/sriov_numvfs&
> >> echo 63 > /sys/class/net/ethX/device/sriov_numvfs
> >>
> >> sleep 5
> >>
> >> echo 0 > /sys/class/net/ethX/device/sriov_numvfs&
> >> echo 0 > /sys/class/net/ethX/device/sriov_numvfs
> >>
> >> Results in the following bug:
> >>
> >> kernel BUG at drivers/pci/iov.c:495!
> >> invalid opcode: 0000 [#1] SMP
> >> CPU: 1 PID: 8050 Comm: bash Tainted: G W 4.9.0-rc7-net-next #2092
> >> RIP: 0010:[<ffffffff813b1647>]
> >> [<ffffffff813b1647>] pci_iov_release+0x57/0x60
> >>
> >> Call Trace:
> >> [<ffffffff81391726>] pci_release_dev+0x26/0x70
> >> [<ffffffff8155be6e>] device_release+0x3e/0xb0
> >> [<ffffffff81365ee7>] kobject_cleanup+0x67/0x180
> >> [<ffffffff81365d9d>] kobject_put+0x2d/0x60
> >> [<ffffffff8155bc27>] put_device+0x17/0x20
> >> [<ffffffff8139c08a>] pci_dev_put+0x1a/0x20
> >> [<ffffffff8139cb6b>] pci_get_dev_by_id+0x5b/0x90
> >> [<ffffffff8139cca5>] pci_get_subsys+0x35/0x40
> >> [<ffffffff8139ccc8>] pci_get_device+0x18/0x20
> >> [<ffffffff8139ccfb>] pci_get_domain_bus_and_slot+0x2b/0x60
> >> [<ffffffff813b09e7>] pci_iov_remove_virtfn+0x57/0x180
> >> [<ffffffff813b0b95>] pci_disable_sriov+0x65/0x140
> >> [<ffffffffa00a1af7>] ixgbe_disable_sriov+0xc7/0x1d0 [ixgbe]
> >> [<ffffffffa00a1e9d>] ixgbe_pci_sriov_configure+0x3d/0x170 [ixgbe]
> >> [<ffffffff8139d28c>] sriov_numvfs_store+0xdc/0x130
> >> ...
> >> RIP [<ffffffff813b1647>] pci_iov_release+0x57/0x60
> >>
> >> Use the existing mutex lock to protect each enable/disable operation.
> >>
> >> -v2: move the existing lock from protecting the config of the IOV bus
> >> to protecting the writes to sriov_numvfs in sysfs without maintaining
> >> a "locked" version of pci_iov_add/remove_virtfn().
> >> As suggested by Gavin Shan <gwshan@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
> >>
> >> CC: Alexander Duyck <alexander.h.duyck@...el.com>
> >> Signed-off-by: Emil Tantilov <emil.s.tantilov@...el.com>
> >> ---
> >> drivers/pci/iov.c | 7 -------
> >> drivers/pci/pci-sysfs.c | 23 ++++++++++++++++-------
> >> drivers/pci/pci.h | 2 +-
> >> 3 files changed, 17 insertions(+), 15 deletions(-)
> >>
> >> diff --git a/drivers/pci/iov.c b/drivers/pci/iov.c
> >> index 4722782..2479ae8 100644
> >> --- a/drivers/pci/iov.c
> >> +++ b/drivers/pci/iov.c
> >> @@ -124,7 +124,6 @@ int pci_iov_add_virtfn(struct pci_dev *dev, int id,
> >int reset)
> >> struct pci_sriov *iov = dev->sriov;
> >> struct pci_bus *bus;
> >>
> >> - mutex_lock(&iov->dev->sriov->lock);
> >> bus = virtfn_add_bus(dev->bus, pci_iov_virtfn_bus(dev, id));
> >> if (!bus)
> >> goto failed;
> >> @@ -162,7 +161,6 @@ int pci_iov_add_virtfn(struct pci_dev *dev, int id,
> >int reset)
> >> __pci_reset_function(virtfn);
> >>
> >> pci_device_add(virtfn, virtfn->bus);
> >> - mutex_unlock(&iov->dev->sriov->lock);
> >>
> >> pci_bus_add_device(virtfn);
> >> sprintf(buf, "virtfn%u", id);
> >> @@ -181,12 +179,10 @@ int pci_iov_add_virtfn(struct pci_dev *dev, int id,
> >int reset)
> >> sysfs_remove_link(&dev->dev.kobj, buf);
> >> failed1:
> >> pci_dev_put(dev);
> >> - mutex_lock(&iov->dev->sriov->lock);
> >> pci_stop_and_remove_bus_device(virtfn);
> >> failed0:
> >> virtfn_remove_bus(dev->bus, bus);
> >> failed:
> >> - mutex_unlock(&iov->dev->sriov->lock);
> >>
> >> return rc;
> >> }
> >> @@ -195,7 +191,6 @@ void pci_iov_remove_virtfn(struct pci_dev *dev, int
> >id, int reset)
> >> {
> >> char buf[VIRTFN_ID_LEN];
> >> struct pci_dev *virtfn;
> >> - struct pci_sriov *iov = dev->sriov;
> >>
> >> virtfn = pci_get_domain_bus_and_slot(pci_domain_nr(dev->bus),
> >> pci_iov_virtfn_bus(dev, id),
> >> @@ -218,10 +213,8 @@ void pci_iov_remove_virtfn(struct pci_dev *dev, int
> >id, int reset)
> >> if (virtfn->dev.kobj.sd)
> >> sysfs_remove_link(&virtfn->dev.kobj, "physfn");
> >>
> >> - mutex_lock(&iov->dev->sriov->lock);
> >> pci_stop_and_remove_bus_device(virtfn);
> >> virtfn_remove_bus(dev->bus, virtfn->bus);
> >> - mutex_unlock(&iov->dev->sriov->lock);
> >>
> >> /* balance pci_get_domain_bus_and_slot() */
> >> pci_dev_put(virtfn);
> >> diff --git a/drivers/pci/pci-sysfs.c b/drivers/pci/pci-sysfs.c
> >> index 0666287..25d010d 100644
> >> --- a/drivers/pci/pci-sysfs.c
> >> +++ b/drivers/pci/pci-sysfs.c
> >> @@ -472,6 +472,7 @@ static ssize_t sriov_numvfs_store(struct device *dev,
> >> const char *buf, size_t count)
> >> {
> >> struct pci_dev *pdev = to_pci_dev(dev);
> >> + struct pci_sriov *iov = pdev->sriov;
> >> int ret;
> >> u16 num_vfs;
> >>
> >> @@ -482,38 +483,46 @@ static ssize_t sriov_numvfs_store(struct device
> >*dev,
> >> if (num_vfs > pci_sriov_get_totalvfs(pdev))
> >> return -ERANGE;
> >>
> >> + mutex_lock(&iov->dev->sriov->lock);
> >> +
> >> if (num_vfs == pdev->sriov->num_VFs)
> >> - return count; /* no change */
> >> + goto exit;
> >>
> >> /* is PF driver loaded w/callback */
> >> if (!pdev->driver || !pdev->driver->sriov_configure) {
> >> dev_info(&pdev->dev, "Driver doesn't support SRIOV
> >configuration via sysfs\n");
> >> - return -ENOSYS;
> >> + ret = -ENOENT;
> >> + goto exit;
> >
> >Hi Emil,
> >
> >Generally the patch looks fine to me - but I am wondering why the change
> >from -ENOSYS TO -ENOENT?
>
> Because checkpatch was complaining that ENOSYS should only be used for
> "invalid syscall nr".
>
> If you look at the discussion of the previous version of the patch you can
> see the details there. Basically Gavin preferred ENOENT and I don't really
> care so much (I kind of ran into this by accident as this patch does not need
> to change the error code).
Ah, OK. Thanks for the explanation! Tell all my old buddies there at
Intel I said hi.
Regards,
- Greg
>
> Thanks,
> Emil
Powered by blists - more mailing lists