linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 3/3] vfio/pci: Don't probe devices that can't be reset

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]

Date:   Fri, 18 Aug 2017 08:57:09 -0700
From:   David Daney <ddaney@...iumnetworks.com>
To:     Alex Williamson <alex.williamson@...hat.com>,
        Jan Glauber <jan.glauber@...iumnetworks.com>
Cc:     Bjorn Helgaas <bhelgaas@...gle.com>, linux-pci@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, david.daney@...ium.com,
        Jon Masters <jcm@...hat.com>,
        Robert Richter <robert.richter@...ium.com>,
        linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, kvm@...r.kernel.org,
        Jon Masters <jcm@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 3/3] vfio/pci: Don't probe devices that can't be reset

On 08/18/2017 07:12 AM, Alex Williamson wrote:
> On Fri, 18 Aug 2017 15:42:31 +0200
> Jan Glauber <jan.glauber@...iumnetworks.com> wrote:
> 
>> On Thu, Aug 17, 2017 at 07:00:17AM -0600, Alex Williamson wrote:
>>> On Thu, 17 Aug 2017 10:14:23 +0200
>>> Jan Glauber <jglauber@...ium.com> wrote:
>>>    
>>>> If a PCI device supports neither function-level reset, nor slot
>>>> or bus reset then refuse to probe it. A line is printed to inform
>>>> the user.
>>>
>>> But that's not what this does, this requires that the device is on a
>>> reset-able bus.  This is a massive regression.  With this we could no
>>> longer assign devices on the root complex or any device which doesn't
>>> return from bus reset and currently makes use of the NO_BUS_RESET flag
>>> and works happily otherwise.  Full NAK.  Thanks,
>>
>> Looks like I missed the slot reset check. So how about this:
>>
>> if (pci_probe_reset_slot(pdev->slot) && pci_probe_reset_bus(pdev->bus)) {
>> 	dev_warn(...);
>> 	return -ENODEV;
>> }
>>
>> Or am I still missing something here?
> 
> We don't require that a device is on a reset-able bus/slot, so any
> attempt to impose that requirement means that there are devices that
> might work perfectly fine that are now excluded from assignment.  The
> entire premise is unacceptable.  Thanks,


You previously rejected the idea to silently ignore bus reset requests 
on buses that do not support it.

So this leaves us with two options:

1) Do nothing, and crash the kernel on systems with bad combinations of 
PCIe target devices and cn88xx when vfio_pci is used.

2) Do something else.

We are trying to figure out what that something else should be.  The 
general concept we are working on is that if vfio_pci wants to reset a 
device, *and* bus reset is the only option available, *and* cn88xx, then 
make vfio_pci fail.

What is your opinion of doing that (assuming it is properly implemented)?

Thanks,
David Daney