linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v3 1/9] s390: vfio_ap: link the vfio_ap devices to the vfio

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: <20190218175747.53212f95.cohuck@redhat.com>
Date:   Mon, 18 Feb 2019 17:57:47 +0100
From:   Cornelia Huck <cohuck@...hat.com>
To:     Tony Krowiak <akrowiak@...ux.ibm.com>
Cc:     pmorel@...ux.ibm.com, borntraeger@...ibm.com,
        alex.williamson@...hat.com, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-s390@...r.kernel.org, kvm@...r.kernel.org,
        frankja@...ux.ibm.com, pasic@...ux.ibm.com, david@...hat.com,
        schwidefsky@...ibm.com, heiko.carstens@...ibm.com,
        freude@...ux.ibm.com, mimu@...ux.ibm.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 1/9] s390: vfio_ap: link the vfio_ap devices to the
 vfio_ap bus subsystem

On Mon, 18 Feb 2019 11:35:45 -0500
Tony Krowiak <akrowiak@...ux.ibm.com> wrote:

> On 2/18/19 7:01 AM, Cornelia Huck wrote:
> > On Fri, 15 Feb 2019 16:59:33 -0500
> > Tony Krowiak <akrowiak@...ux.ibm.com> wrote:
> >   
> >> On 2/15/19 4:11 AM, Cornelia Huck wrote:  
> >>> On Thu, 14 Feb 2019 13:30:59 -0500
> >>> Tony Krowiak <akrowiak@...ux.ibm.com> wrote:
> >>>      
> >>>> On 2/14/19 12:36 PM, Pierre Morel wrote:  
> >>>>> On 14/02/2019 17:57, Cornelia Huck wrote:  
> >   
> >>>>>> (And reading further in the current code, it seems we clear that
> >>>>>> structure _after_ the matrix device had been setup, so how can that
> >>>>>> even work? Where am I confused?)  
> >>>>>
> >>>>> On device_register there were no bus, so the core just do not look for a
> >>>>> driver and this field was nor tested nor overwritten.  
> >>>
> >>> Hm... so has the callback in driver_for_each_device() in
> >>> vfio_ap_verify_queue_reserved() ever been invoked at all? It seems this
> >>> patch fixes more than just libudev issues...  
> >>
> >> It is this patch that rendered the driver_for_each_device() in
> >> vfio_ap_verify_queue_reserved() erroneous. That function gets called
> >> every time an adapter or domain is assigned to the mdev. This patch
> >> introduced the problem with driver_for_each_device().  
> > 
> > So, does this function need to be removed or called from another place,
> > then? (It looks like it was dead code before.)  
> 
> I don't see why you think it's dead code:
> 
> assign_adapter_store
> ==> vfio_ap_mdev_verify_queues_reserved_for_apid
>      ==> vfio_ap_verify_queue_reserved
>          ==> driver_for_each_device  
> 
> The only way that the vfio_ap_verify_queue_reserved - the function that
> calls driver_for_each_device - does not get called is if no bits have
> yet been set in matrix_mdev->matrix.aqm.

What I don't see is how this can be called if no device has been, in
fact, bound to the driver in the driver core...