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  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:   Tue, 26 Feb 2019 22:37:26 +0000
From:   <Alex_Gagniuc@...lteam.com>
To:     <keith.busch@...el.com>
CC:     <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>, <axboe@...com>,
        <sagi@...mberg.me>, <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        <linux-nvme@...ts.infradead.org>, <mr.nuke.me@...il.com>,
        <hch@....de>, <jonathan.derrick@...el.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] nvme-pci: Prevent mmio reads if pci channel offline

On 2/25/19 9:55 AM, Keith Busch wrote:
> On Sun, Feb 24, 2019 at 03:27:09PM -0800, Alex_Gagniuc@...lteam.com wrote:
>> [   57.680494] {1}[Hardware Error]: Hardware error from APEI Generic  Hardware Error Source: 1
>> [   57.680495] {1}[Hardware Error]: event severity: fatal
>> [   57.680496] {1}[Hardware Error]:  Error 0, type: fatal
>> [   57.680496] {1}[Hardware Error]:   section_type: PCIe error
>> [   57.680497] {1}[Hardware Error]:   port_type: 6, downstream switch port
>> [   57.680498] {1}[Hardware Error]:   version: 3.0
>> [   57.680498] {1}[Hardware Error]:   command: 0x0407, status: 0x0010
>> [   57.680499] {1}[Hardware Error]:   device_id: 0000:3c:07.0
>> [   57.680499] {1}[Hardware Error]:   slot: 1
>> [   57.680500] {1}[Hardware Error]:   secondary_bus: 0x40
>> [   57.680500] {1}[Hardware Error]:   vendor_id: 0x10b5, device_id: 0x9733
>> [   57.680501] {1}[Hardware Error]:   class_code: 000406
>> [   57.680502] {1}[Hardware Error]:   bridge: secondary_status: 0x0000, > control: 0x0003
> 
> This is a reaction to a ERR_FATAL message, right? What happens if we
> ignore firmware first and override control of the AER masking with a
> set to the Unsupported Request Error Mask in the root and downstream
> ports? You can do a quick test like this for the above's hardware:
> 
>    # setpci -s 3c:07.0 ECAP_AER+8.l=100000:100000
> 
> You'd probably have to do the same command to the root port BDf, and any
> other switches you have them in the hierarchy.

Then nobody gets the (error) message. You can go a bit further and try 
'pcie_ports=native". Again, nobody gets the memo. ):

Alex

Powered by blists - more mailing lists