netdev - [net-next 10/12] igbvf: after mailbox write, wait for reply

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,  9 Aug 2017 14:47:44 -0700
From:   Jeff Kirsher <jeffrey.t.kirsher@...el.com>
To:     davem@...emloft.net
Cc:     Greg Edwards <gedwards@....com>, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
        nhorman@...hat.com, sassmann@...hat.com, jogreene@...hat.com,
        Jeff Kirsher <jeffrey.t.kirsher@...el.com>
Subject: [net-next 10/12] igbvf: after mailbox write, wait for reply

From: Greg Edwards <gedwards@....com>

Two of the VF mailbox commands were not waiting for a reply from the PF,
which can result in a VF mailbox timeout in the VM for the next command.

Signed-off-by: Greg Edwards <gedwards@....com>
Tested-by: Aaron Brown <aaron.f.brown@...el.com>
Signed-off-by: Jeff Kirsher <jeffrey.t.kirsher@...el.com>
---
 drivers/net/ethernet/intel/igbvf/vf.c | 10 ++++++++--
 1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)

diff --git a/drivers/net/ethernet/intel/igbvf/vf.c b/drivers/net/ethernet/intel/igbvf/vf.c
index 528be116184e..1d3aa9adcaa8 100644
--- a/drivers/net/ethernet/intel/igbvf/vf.c
+++ b/drivers/net/ethernet/intel/igbvf/vf.c
@@ -230,6 +230,7 @@ static void e1000_update_mc_addr_list_vf(struct e1000_hw *hw,
 	u16 *hash_list = (u16 *)&msgbuf[1];
 	u32 hash_value;
 	u32 cnt, i;
+	s32 ret_val;
 
 	/* Each entry in the list uses 1 16 bit word.  We have 30
 	 * 16 bit words available in our HW msg buffer (minus 1 for the
@@ -250,7 +251,9 @@ static void e1000_update_mc_addr_list_vf(struct e1000_hw *hw,
 		mc_addr_list += ETH_ALEN;
 	}
 
-	mbx->ops.write_posted(hw, msgbuf, E1000_VFMAILBOX_SIZE);
+	ret_val = mbx->ops.write_posted(hw, msgbuf, E1000_VFMAILBOX_SIZE);
+	if (!ret_val)
+		mbx->ops.read_posted(hw, msgbuf, 1);
 }
 
 /**
@@ -293,11 +296,14 @@ void e1000_rlpml_set_vf(struct e1000_hw *hw, u16 max_size)
 {
 	struct e1000_mbx_info *mbx = &hw->mbx;
 	u32 msgbuf[2];
+	s32 ret_val;
 
 	msgbuf[0] = E1000_VF_SET_LPE;
 	msgbuf[1] = max_size;
 
-	mbx->ops.write_posted(hw, msgbuf, 2);
+	ret_val = mbx->ops.write_posted(hw, msgbuf, 2);
+	if (!ret_val)
+		mbx->ops.read_posted(hw, msgbuf, 1);
 }
 
 /**
-- 
2.13.3