linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 1/6] PCI: acpiphp: do not check for SLOT_ENABLED in enable

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: <CAErSpo4Ks+8PPvpscWZE7LrRd-daOzV-kJi6Oim42A+nZnp3HQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date:	Wed, 26 Jun 2013 17:28:30 -0600
From:	Bjorn Helgaas <bhelgaas@...gle.com>
To:	Mika Westerberg <mika.westerberg@...ux.intel.com>
Cc:	Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
	"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael.j.wysocki@...el.com>,
	Jesse Barnes <jbarnes@...tuousgeek.org>,
	Yinghai Lu <yinghai@...nel.org>,
	"Ronciak, John" <john.ronciak@...el.com>,
	"Penner, Miles J" <miles.j.penner@...el.com>,
	Bruce Allan <bruce.w.allan@...el.com>,
	"Kirill A. Shutemov" <kirill.shutemov@...ux.intel.com>,
	Heikki Krogerus <heikki.krogerus@...ux.intel.com>,
	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	"linux-pci@...r.kernel.org" <linux-pci@...r.kernel.org>,
	"x86@...nel.org" <x86@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/6] PCI: acpiphp: do not check for SLOT_ENABLED in enable_device()

On Tue, Jun 25, 2013 at 10:22 AM, Mika Westerberg
<mika.westerberg@...ux.intel.com> wrote:
> From: "Kirill A. Shutemov" <kirill.shutemov@...ux.intel.com>
>
> With Thunderbolt you can chain devices: connect a new devices to plugged
> one. In this case the slot is already enabled, but we still want to look
> for new devices behind it.
>
> We're going to reuse enable_device() for rescan for new devices on the
> enabled slot. Let's push the check up by stack.
>
> Signed-off-by: Kirill A. Shutemov <kirill.shutemov@...ux.intel.com>
> Signed-off-by: Mika Westerberg <mika.westerberg@...ux.intel.com>
> ---
>  drivers/pci/hotplug/acpiphp_glue.c | 5 ++---
>  1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/pci/hotplug/acpiphp_glue.c b/drivers/pci/hotplug/acpiphp_glue.c
> index 59df857..b983e29 100644
> --- a/drivers/pci/hotplug/acpiphp_glue.c
> +++ b/drivers/pci/hotplug/acpiphp_glue.c
> @@ -688,9 +688,6 @@ static int __ref enable_device(struct acpiphp_slot *slot)
>         int num, max, pass;
>         LIST_HEAD(add_list);
>
> -       if (slot->flags & SLOT_ENABLED)
> -               goto err_exit;
> -
>         list_for_each_entry(func, &slot->funcs, sibling)
>                 acpiphp_bus_add(func);
>
> @@ -1242,6 +1239,8 @@ int acpiphp_enable_slot(struct acpiphp_slot *slot)
>                 goto err_exit;
>
>         if (get_slot_status(slot) == ACPI_STA_ALL) {
> +               if (slot->flags & SLOT_ENABLED)
> +                       goto err_exit;

Why do we check for SLOT_ENABLED at all?  I think we're handling a Bus
Check notification, which means "re-enumerate on the device tree
starting from the notification point."  It doesn't say anything about
skipping the re-enumeration if we find a device that's already
enabled.

It seems like we ought to just re-enumerate all the way down in case a
device was added farther down in the tree (which is what it sounds
like Thunderbolt is doing).

>                 /* configure all functions */
>                 retval = enable_device(slot);
>                 if (retval)
> --
> 1.8.3.1
>
--
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/