linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 06/10] x86/PCI: Enable scanning of all pci functions

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]

Message-ID: <20090513095535.140134e1@jbarnes-g45>
Date:	Wed, 13 May 2009 09:55:35 -0700
From:	Jesse Barnes <jbarnes@...tuousgeek.org>
To:	Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy@...p.org>
Cc:	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
	the arch/x86 maintainers <x86@...nel.org>,
	Matthew Wilcox <willy@...ux.intel.com>,
	Joerg Roedel <joerg.roedel@....com>,
	FUJITA Tomonori <fujita.tomonori@....ntt.co.jp>,
	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Xen-devel <xen-devel@...ts.xensource.com>,
	Alex Nixon <alex.nixon@...rix.com>,
	Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy.fitzhardinge@...rix.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 06/10] x86/PCI: Enable scanning of all pci functions

On Tue, 12 May 2009 14:48:07 -0700
Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy@...p.org> wrote:

> From: Alex Nixon <alex.nixon@...rix.com>
> 
> Xen may want to enable scanning of all pci functions - if for example
> the device at function 0 is not passed through to the guest, but the
> device at function 1 is.
> 
> [Impact: allow passthrough of just some PCI functions.]
> Signed-off-by: Alex Nixon <alex.nixon@...rix.com>
> Signed-off-by: Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy.fitzhardinge@...rix.com>
> Reviewed-by: "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>
> Reviewed-by: Matthew Wilcox <willy@...ux.intel.com>
> ---
>  arch/x86/include/asm/pci.h |    8 +++++++-
>  arch/x86/pci/common.c      |    1 +
>  2 files changed, 8 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/arch/x86/include/asm/pci.h b/arch/x86/include/asm/pci.h
> index b51a1e8..092706e 100644
> --- a/arch/x86/include/asm/pci.h
> +++ b/arch/x86/include/asm/pci.h
> @@ -21,6 +21,7 @@ struct pci_sysdata {
>  extern int pci_routeirq;
>  extern int noioapicquirk;
>  extern int noioapicreroute;
> +extern int pci_scan_all_fns;
>  
>  /* scan a bus after allocating a pci_sysdata for it */
>  extern struct pci_bus *pci_scan_bus_on_node(int busno, struct
> pci_ops *ops, @@ -48,7 +49,11 @@ extern unsigned int
> pcibios_assign_all_busses(void); #else
>  #define pcibios_assign_all_busses()	0
>  #endif
> -#define pcibios_scan_all_fns(a, b)	0
> +
> +static inline int pcibios_scan_all_fns(struct pci_bus *bus, int
> devfn) +{
> +	return pci_scan_all_fns;
> +}
>  
>  extern unsigned long pci_mem_start;
>  #define PCIBIOS_MIN_IO		0x1000
> @@ -130,6 +135,7 @@ extern void pci_iommu_alloc(void);
>  
>  /* generic pci stuff */
>  #include <asm-generic/pci.h>
> +#undef pcibios_scan_all_fns

This is a little gross... But then I don't see any places where it's
actually defined to something true either.  Maybe it should be a weak
function or a new HAVE_FOO define instead.

-- 
Jesse Barnes, Intel Open Source Technology Center
--
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/