linux-kernel - Re: [v4,0/3] Workaround for bus/slot reset on Cavium cn8xxx root ports

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]

Date:   Wed, 20 Sep 2017 12:09:12 -0600
From:   Alex Williamson <alex.williamson@...hat.com>
To:     Vadim Lomovtsev <Vadim.Lomovtsev@...iumnetworks.com>
Cc:     Jan Glauber <jglauber@...ium.com>,
        Bjorn Helgaas <bhelgaas@...gle.com>, kvm@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-pci@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        Jon Masters <jcm@...hat.com>,
        linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, david.daney@...ium.com,
        Robert Richter <robert.richter@...ium.com>
Subject: Re: [v4,0/3] Workaround for bus/slot reset on Cavium cn8xxx root
 ports

On Tue, 12 Sep 2017 02:40:49 -0700
Vadim Lomovtsev <Vadim.Lomovtsev@...iumnetworks.com> wrote:

> Hi all,
> 
> Are there any updates on this ?
> Comments/objections/acks/nacks ?
> 
> WBBR,
> Vadim
> 
> On Fri, Sep 08, 2017 at 10:10:30AM +0200, Jan Glauber wrote:
> > Using vfio-pci on a combination of cn8xxx and some PCI devices results in
> > a kernel panic. This is triggered by issuing a bus or a slot reset
> > on the PCI device.
> > 
> > With this series both checks indicate that the reset is not possible
> > preventing the kernel panic.
> > 
> > David Daney (2):
> >   PCI: Allow PCI_DEV_FLAGS_NO_BUS_RESET to be used on bus device
> >   PCI: Avoid bus reset for Cavium cn8xxx root ports
> > 
> > Jan Glauber (1):
> >   PCI: Avoid slot reset if bus reset is not possible
> > 
> >  drivers/pci/pci.c    | 8 ++++++++
> >  drivers/pci/quirks.c | 8 ++++++++
> >  2 files changed, 16 insertions(+)  


Looks ok to me, for series:

Reviewed-by: Alex Williamson <alex.williamson@...hat.com>

I am curious why we're happy targeting this quirk at a single device ID
while at the same time trying to expand the ACS quirk to a notable
fraction of the Cavium PCI device ID address space.  Thanks,

Alex