linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 3/3] PCI: imx6: limit DBI register length

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: <CAHQ1cqFprD4k+aO_x-znEs6sXpx9jxih-moSuNZZ3dAKHuLpPw@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Tue, 27 Nov 2018 17:28:13 -0800
From:   Andrey Smirnov <andrew.smirnov@...il.com>
To:     Fabio Estevam <festevam@...il.com>
Cc:     Stefan Agner <stefan@...er.ch>, Jingoo Han <jingoohan1@...il.com>,
        gustavo.pimentel@...opsys.com,
        Lucas Stach <l.stach@...gutronix.de>,
        Trent Piepho <tpiepho@...inj.com>,
        Bjorn Helgaas <bhelgaas@...gle.com>, linux-pci@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Leonard Crestez <leonard.crestez@....com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 3/3] PCI: imx6: limit DBI register length

On Tue, Nov 27, 2018 at 5:12 PM Fabio Estevam <festevam@...il.com> wrote:
>
> Hi Andrey,
>
> On Tue, Nov 27, 2018 at 10:57 PM Andrey Smirnov
> <andrew.smirnov@...il.com> wrote:
>
> > Could this be a regression? Prior to 415b6185c541 ("PCI: imx6: Fix
> > config read timeout handling") all of the imprecise aborts were caught
> > and handled via no-op handler. I did an experiment on i.MX6Q board
> > that I have (ZII RDU2) and adding a simple no-op for imprecise aborts
> > via
> >
> > hook_fault_code(16 + 6, imx6q_pcie_no_op_handler, SIGBUS, 0,
> >                        "imprecise external abort");
> >
> > seems to "resolve" this problem:
>
> Please check https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/9720313/
>
> This commit fixed a kernel crash on mx6q boards with a PCI switch.
>
> So we can't go back to the simple no-op.

It's probably not exactly clear form my message, but I wasn't
proposing to go back to a no-op. What I had in mind is having a no-op
handler for imprecise aborts _alongside_ the non-linefetch handlers
that is already there when running against i.MX6Q type of the IP
block.

Thanks,
Andrey Smirnov