linux-kernel - Re: lspci: Display path to device

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: <20180717210053.GB128988@bhelgaas-glaptop.roam.corp.google.com>
Date:   Tue, 17 Jul 2018 16:00:53 -0500
From:   Bjorn Helgaas <helgaas@...nel.org>
To:     Matthew Wilcox <willy@...radead.org>
Cc:     Martin Mares <mj@....cz>, Logan Gunthorpe <logang@...tatee.com>,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-pci@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-doc@...r.kernel.org, Stephen Bates <sbates@...thlin.com>,
        Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>,
        Bjorn Helgaas <bhelgaas@...gle.com>,
        Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
        "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
        Marc Zyngier <marc.zyngier@....com>,
        Kai-Heng Feng <kai.heng.feng@...onical.com>,
        Frederic Weisbecker <frederic@...nel.org>,
        Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@...el.com>,
        Jérôme Glisse <jglisse@...hat.com>,
        Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@...nel.crashing.org>,
        Alex Williamson <alex.williamson@...hat.com>,
        Christian König <christian.koenig@....com>
Subject: Re: lspci: Display path to device

On Tue, Jul 17, 2018 at 01:39:00PM -0700, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
> I don't like telling the user to grovel around lspci -t by hand.  It's
> not many lines of code to add a new -P option to lspci to show the path
> to each device instead of bus:dev.fn
> 
> Here's three examples, first without, then with -P.
> ...

> The Nehalem system makes an interesting testcase because it exposes some
> registers in fake PCIe devices that aren't behind the root ports.  eg:
> 
> ff:06.3 Host bridge: Intel Corporation Xeon 5500/Core i7 Integrated Memory Controller Channel 2 Thermal Control Registers (rev 04)

I think these appear as conventional PCI devices; at least the ones
I've seen, e.g., [1], don't have a PCIe capability, so I think it
makes sense that they're not behind a root port.

[1] https://bugzilla5.redhat.com/attachment.cgi?id=433169