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-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <1353693037-21704-1-git-send-email-vasilis.liaskovitis@profitbricks.com>
Date:	Fri, 23 Nov 2012 18:50:34 +0100
From:	Vasilis Liaskovitis <vasilis.liaskovitis@...fitbricks.com>
To:	linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org, isimatu.yasuaki@...fujitsu.com,
	wency@...fujitsu.com
Cc:	rjw@...k.pl, lenb@...nel.org, toshi.kani@...com,
	gregkh@...uxfoundation.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-mm@...ck.org,
	Vasilis Liaskovitis <vasilis.liaskovitis@...fitbricks.com>
Subject: [RFC PATCH v3 0/3] acpi: Introduce prepare_remove device operation

As discussed in https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/1581581/
the driver core remove function needs to always succeed. This means we need
to know that the device can be successfully removed before acpi_bus_trim / 
acpi_bus_hot_remove_device are called. This can cause panics when OSPM-initiated
or SCI-initiated eject of memory devices fail e.g with:
echo 1 >/sys/bus/pci/devices/PNP0C80:XX/eject

since the ACPI core goes ahead and ejects the device regardless of whether the
the memory is still in use or not.

For this reason a new acpi_device operation called prepare_remove is introduced.
This operation should be registered for acpi devices whose removal (from kernel
perspective) can fail.  Memory devices fall in this category.

acpi_bus_remove() is changed to handle removal in 2 steps:
- preparation for removal i.e. perform part of removal that can fail. Should
  succeed for device and all its children.
- if above step was successfull, proceed to actual device removal

With this patchset, only acpi memory devices use the new prepare_remove
device operation. The actual memory removal (VM-related offline and other memory
cleanups) is moved to prepare_remove. The old remove operation just cleans up
the acpi structures. Directly ejecting PNP0C80 memory devices works safely. I
haven't tested yet with an ACPI container which contains memory devices.

Note that unbinding the acpi driver from a memory device with:
echo "PNP0C80:XX" > /sys/bus/acpi/drivers/acpi_memhotplug/unbind

will no longer try to remove the memory. This is in compliance with normal
unbind driver core semantics, see the discussion in v2 of this patchset:
https://lkml.org/lkml/2012/11/16/649

After a successful unbind of the driver:
- OSPM ejects of the memory device cannot proceed, as acpi_eject_store will
return -ENODEV on missing driver.
- SCI ejects of the memory device also cannot proceed, as they will also get
a "driver data is NULL" error.
So the memory can continue to be used safely after unbind.

Patchset based on Rafael's linux-pm/linux-next (commit 78c38651).
Comments welcome.

v2->v3:
- remove driver core changes. Only acpi core changes needed. Unbind semantics
follow driver core rules. Unbind does not remove memory.
- new patch to set enable bit in order to proceed with ejects on driver
re-binding scenario.

v1->v2:
- new patch to introduce bus_type prepare_remove callback. Needed to prepare
removal on driver unbinding from device-driver core.
- v1 patches 1 and 2 simplified and merged in one. acpi_bus_trim does not require
argument changes.

Vasilis Liaskovitis (3):
  acpi: Introduce prepare_remove operation in acpi_device_ops
  acpi_memhotplug: Add prepare_remove operation
  acpi_memhotplug: Allow eject to proceed on rebind scenario

 drivers/acpi/acpi_memhotplug.c |   21 +++++++++++++++++----
 drivers/acpi/scan.c            |    9 ++++++++-
 include/acpi/acpi_bus.h        |    2 ++
 3 files changed, 27 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)

-- 
1.7.9

--
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/

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ