| 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
| ||
|
Message-ID: <1859870.HzuzAL1ZiX@vostro.rjw.lan>
Date: Thu, 09 Apr 2015 01:44:08 +0200
From: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...ysocki.net>
To: Jiang Liu <jiang.liu@...ux.intel.com>
Cc: Bjorn Helgaas <bhelgaas@...gle.com>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>, x86@...nel.org,
Len Brown <lenb@...nel.org>, Lv Zheng <lv.zheng@...el.com>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, linux-pci@...r.kernel.org,
linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [Bugfix v3] x86/PCI/ACPI: Fix regression caused by commit 63f1789ec716
On Wednesday, April 08, 2015 01:48:46 PM Jiang Liu wrote:
> On 2015/4/7 8:28, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> > On Friday, April 03, 2015 10:04:11 PM Bjorn Helgaas wrote:
> >> Hi Jiang,
> <snip>
> >>> Currently acpi_dev_filter_resource_type() is only used by ACPI pci
> >>> host bridge and IOAPIC driver, so it shouldn't affect other drivers.
> >>
> >> We should assume it will eventually be used for all ACPI devices,
> >> shouldn't we?
> >
> > I'm not sure about that, really. In fact, I'd restrict its use to devices
> > types that actually can "produce" resources (ie. do not require the resources
> > to be provided by their ancestors or to be available from a global pool).
> >
> > Otherwise we're pretty much guaranteed to get into trouble.
> >
> > And all of the above rules need to be documented in the kernel source tree
> > or people will get confused.
> Hi Rafael,
> How about following comments for acpi_dev_filter_resource_type()?
> Thanks!
> Gerry
> --------------------------------------------------------------------
> /**
> * According to ACPI specifications, Consumer/Producer flag in ACPI resource
> * descriptor means:
> * 1(CONSUMER): This device consumes this resource
> * 0(PRODUCER): This device produces and consumes this resource
> * But for ACPI PCI host bridge, it is interpreted in another way:
So first of all, this leads to a question: Why is it interpreted for ACPI PCI
host bridges differently?
Is it something we've figured out from experience, or is there a standard
mandating that?
> * 1(CONSUMER): PCI host bridge itself consumes the resource, such as
> * IOPORT 0xCF8-0xCFF to access PCI configuraiton space.
> * 0(PRODUCER): PCI host bridge provides this resource to its child
> * bus and devices.
> *
> * So this is a specially designed helper function to support ACPI PCI host
> * bridge and ACPI IOAPIC, and its usage should be limited to those specific
And this will make the reader wonder why the IOAPIC should be treated the same
way as a PCI host bridge in that respect.
> * scenarioso only. It filters ACPI resource descriptors as below:
> * 1) If flag IORESOURCE_WINDOW is not specified, it's querying resources
> * consumed by device. That is to return:
> * a) ACPI resources without producer_consumer flag
> * b) ACPI resources with producer_consumer flag setting to CONSUMER.
> * 2) If flag IORESOURCE_WINDOW is specified, it's querying resources
> provided
> * by device. That is to return:
> * a) ACPI resources with producer_consumer flag setting to PRODUCER.
> * 3) But there's an exception. Some platforms, such as PC Engines APU.1C,
> * report PCI host bridge resource provision by Memory32Fixed().
> * Please refer to https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=94221
> * So a special flag IORESOURCE_MEM_8AND16BIT is used to work around this
> * BIOS issue.
> */
>
> >
> >>> Another possible fix is to only ignore IO resource consumed by host
> >>> bridge and keep IOMEM resource consumed by host bridge, please refer to:
> >>> http://www.spinics.net/lists/linux-pci/msg39706.html
> >>>
> >>> Sample ACPI table are archived at:
> >>> https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=94221
> >>>
> >>> V2->V3:
> >>> Refine function acpi_dev_match_producer_consumer() as suggested by Rafael
> >>>
> >>> Fixes: 63f1789ec716("Ignore resources consumed by host bridge itself")
> >>> Reported-and-Tested-by: Bernhard Thaler <bernhard.thaler@...et.at>
> >>> Signed-off-by: Jiang Liu <jiang.liu@...ux.intel.com>
> >>> ---
> >>> arch/x86/pci/acpi.c | 5 ++---
> >>> drivers/acpi/resource.c | 33 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++----
> >>> 2 files changed, 31 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)
> >>>
> >>> diff --git a/arch/x86/pci/acpi.c b/arch/x86/pci/acpi.c
> >>> index e4695985f9de..8c4b1201f340 100644
> >>> --- a/arch/x86/pci/acpi.c
> >>> +++ b/arch/x86/pci/acpi.c
> >>> @@ -337,7 +337,7 @@ static void probe_pci_root_info(struct pci_root_info *info,
> >>> info->bridge = device;
> >>> ret = acpi_dev_get_resources(device, list,
> >>> acpi_dev_filter_resource_type_cb,
> >>> - (void *)(IORESOURCE_IO | IORESOURCE_MEM));
> >>> + (void *)(IORESOURCE_IO | IORESOURCE_MEM | IORESOURCE_WINDOW));
> >>> if (ret < 0)
> >>> dev_warn(&device->dev,
> >>> "failed to parse _CRS method, error code %d\n", ret);
> >>> @@ -346,8 +346,7 @@ static void probe_pci_root_info(struct pci_root_info *info,
> >>> "no IO and memory resources present in _CRS\n");
> >>> else
> >>> resource_list_for_each_entry_safe(entry, tmp, list) {
> >>> - if ((entry->res->flags & IORESOURCE_WINDOW) == 0 ||
> >>> - (entry->res->flags & IORESOURCE_DISABLED))
> >>> + if (entry->res->flags & IORESOURCE_DISABLED)
> >>> resource_list_destroy_entry(entry);
> >>> else
> >>> entry->res->name = info->name;
> >>> diff --git a/drivers/acpi/resource.c b/drivers/acpi/resource.c
> >>> index 5589a6e2a023..e761a868bdba 100644
> >>> --- a/drivers/acpi/resource.c
> >>> +++ b/drivers/acpi/resource.c
> >>> @@ -567,6 +567,12 @@ int acpi_dev_get_resources(struct acpi_device *adev, struct list_head *list,
> >>> }
> >>> EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(acpi_dev_get_resources);
> >>>
> >>> +static bool acpi_dev_match_producer_consumer(unsigned long types, int producer)
> >>> +{
> >>> + return ((types & IORESOURCE_WINDOW) && producer == ACPI_PRODUCER) ||
> >>> + ((types & IORESOURCE_WINDOW) == 0 && producer == ACPI_CONSUMER);
> >>> +}
> >>> +
> >>> /**
> >>> * acpi_dev_filter_resource_type - Filter ACPI resource according to resource
> >>> * types
> >>> @@ -585,27 +591,46 @@ int acpi_dev_filter_resource_type(struct acpi_resource *ares,
> >>> case ACPI_RESOURCE_TYPE_MEMORY24:
> >>> case ACPI_RESOURCE_TYPE_MEMORY32:
> >>> case ACPI_RESOURCE_TYPE_FIXED_MEMORY32:
> >>> + /*
> >>> + * These types of resource descriptor should be used to
> >>> + * describe resource consumption instead of resource provision.
> >>> + * But some platforms, such as PC Engines APU.1C, reports
> >>> + * resource provision by Memory32Fixed(). Please refer to:
> >>> + * https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=94221
> >>> + * So accept it no matter IORESOURCE_WINDOW is specified or not.
> >>> + */
> >>> type = IORESOURCE_MEM;
> >>
> >> I think this means these resources will be accepted regardless of whether
> >> the caller is looking for Consumer or Producer resources. To preserve the
> >> behavior I added with 66528fdd45b0, we might be forced to do that for PCI
> >> host bridges (or maybe we could just add a quirk for the PC Engines BIOS).
> >>
> >> But I don't think it matches the ACPI spec intent, so I'm not sure it's
> >> right to do it for all devices.
> >
> > No, it isn't, which is why acpi_dev_filter_resource_type() should not be used
> > for all devices.
> >
> >>> break;
> >>> case ACPI_RESOURCE_TYPE_IO:
> >>> case ACPI_RESOURCE_TYPE_FIXED_IO:
> >>> - type = IORESOURCE_IO;
> >>> + if (acpi_dev_match_producer_consumer(types, ACPI_CONSUMER))
> >>> + type = IORESOURCE_IO;
> >>> break;
> >>> case ACPI_RESOURCE_TYPE_IRQ:
> >>> + if (acpi_dev_match_producer_consumer(types, ACPI_CONSUMER))
> >>> + type = IORESOURCE_IRQ;
> >>> + break;
> >>> case ACPI_RESOURCE_TYPE_EXTENDED_IRQ:
> >>> - type = IORESOURCE_IRQ;
> >>> + if (acpi_dev_match_producer_consumer(types,
> >>> + ares->data.extended_irq.producer_consumer))
> >>> + type = IORESOURCE_IRQ;
> >>> break;
> >>> case ACPI_RESOURCE_TYPE_DMA:
> >>> case ACPI_RESOURCE_TYPE_FIXED_DMA:
> >>> - type = IORESOURCE_DMA;
> >>> + if (acpi_dev_match_producer_consumer(types, ACPI_CONSUMER))
> >>> + type = IORESOURCE_DMA;
> >>> break;
> >>> case ACPI_RESOURCE_TYPE_GENERIC_REGISTER:
> >>> - type = IORESOURCE_REG;
> >>> + if (acpi_dev_match_producer_consumer(types, ACPI_CONSUMER))
> >>> + type = IORESOURCE_REG;
> >>> break;
> >>> case ACPI_RESOURCE_TYPE_ADDRESS16:
> >>> case ACPI_RESOURCE_TYPE_ADDRESS32:
> >>> case ACPI_RESOURCE_TYPE_ADDRESS64:
> >>> case ACPI_RESOURCE_TYPE_EXTENDED_ADDRESS64:
> >>> + if (!acpi_dev_match_producer_consumer(types,
> >>> + ares->data.address.producer_consumer))
> >>> + break;
> >>> if (ares->data.address.resource_type == ACPI_MEMORY_RANGE)
> >>> type = IORESOURCE_MEM;
> >>> else if (ares->data.address.resource_type == ACPI_IO_RANGE)
> >> --
> >> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-acpi" in
> >> the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
> >> More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
> >
--
I speak only for myself.
Rafael J. Wysocki, 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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists