linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 2/4] pciehp: Use link change notifications for hot-plug and removal

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <CAErSpo4grMgCBetm7DMmizWQS_peM5yYBwFS99K8jbXaEWGmEg@mail.gmail.com>
Date:	Sun, 15 Dec 2013 17:18:26 -0700
From:	Bjorn Helgaas <bhelgaas@...gle.com>
To:	Rajat Jain <rajatjain@...iper.net>
Cc:	Guenter Roeck <linux@...ck-us.net>,
	Yinghai Lu <yinghai@...nel.org>,
	Rajat Jain <rajatjain.linux@...il.com>,
	"linux-pci@...r.kernel.org" <linux-pci@...r.kernel.org>,
	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Kenji Kaneshige <kaneshige.kenji@...fujitsu.com>,
	Alex Williamson <alex.williamson@...hat.com>,
	Yijing Wang <wangyijing@...wei.com>,
	Paul Bolle <pebolle@...cali.nl>,
	Rajat Jain <rajatxjain@...il.com>,
	Guenter Roeck <groeck@...iper.net>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 2/4] pciehp: Use link change notifications for hot-plug
 and removal

On Sun, Dec 15, 2013 at 4:24 PM, Rajat Jain <rajatjain@...iper.net> wrote:
>> > >
>> > >> Once again: the way I interpret this is:
>> > >> * Always enable Link events.
>> > >> * Disable presence events if attention button is present.
>> > >
>> > > That sounds like a good plan to me.
>> >
>> > How about Diag_Reset from MPT2SAS and others?
>> > link could up and down
>> >
>
> I am assuming you are referring to
>
> static int
> _base_diag_reset(struct MPT2SAS_ADAPTER *ioc, int sleep_flag)
>
> Which as far as I could understand would cause link to go down and come up
>  again without the kernel knowing anything about it?
> ...

> In general, I guess the question is when a link goes down and back up, whether
> or not we want to treat it as a hot unplug followed by a hotplug. I think there
> may be cases such as AER (or the one Yinghai mentions) where we don't want to
> treat it as a hotplug (see note below). And there may be cases that we
> definitely want to treat it as hotplug (need link events!). Situation gets more
> complex since there may be pciehp slots downstream of a link getting reset.
>
> It seems to me that we are saying that a mechanism is needed so that a voluntary
> Link flap is NOT treated like a hotplug temporarily?
> ...

> Notes:
> * it may not OK, if the kernel thinks the device is accessible when it is really not.
>   What if during this downtime, someone tries to access the device (say userspace)?
> * How do we know after the link up, that the device is really the same.
>   If during this reset, the device changed its "character", say a different class?
>   I think a rescan should be mandated after every such event.
>  * Do we need to unload and reload the driver after the link reset, since it can be a different device?

I am quite dubious about the idea of a voluntary link flap.  If the
link goes down and comes back up, I don't see how we can make any
assumptions about what device is there.

I let Alex talk me into pciehp_reset_slot(), which disables presence
detect interrupts while resetting a device, so we already have a bit
of precedent for the idea.  But even in that case, the device could
easily come out of reset as a different device, e.g., if the reset
caused it to load updated firmware.

I would feel much better if we treated link down as a remove and did a
rescan on the link up.

Bjorn
--
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/