linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 4.19 46/51] drm/amdgpu/soc15: skip reset on init

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: <20190610144141.GB31086@kroah.com>
Date:   Mon, 10 Jun 2019 16:41:41 +0200
From:   Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
To:     Pavel Machek <pavel@...x.de>
Cc:     linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, stable@...r.kernel.org,
        Amber Lin <Amber.Lin@....com>,
        Alex Deucher <alexander.deucher@....com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 4.19 46/51] drm/amdgpu/soc15: skip reset on init

On Mon, Jun 10, 2019 at 04:31:46PM +0200, Pavel Machek wrote:
> Hi!
> 
> > From: Alex Deucher <alexander.deucher@....com>
> > 
> > commit 5887a59961e2295c5b02f39dbc0ecf9212709b7b upstream.
> > 
> > Not necessary on soc15 and breaks driver reload on server cards.
> 
> > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/soc15.c
> > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/soc15.c
> > @@ -495,6 +495,11 @@ int soc15_set_ip_blocks(struct amdgpu_de
> >  		return -EINVAL;
> >  	}
> >  
> > +	/* Just return false for soc15 GPUs.  Reset does not seem to
> > +	 * be necessary.
> > +	 */
> > +	return false;
> > +
> >  	if (adev->flags & AMD_IS_APU)
> >  		adev->nbio_funcs = &nbio_v7_0_funcs;
> >  	else if (adev->asic_type == CHIP_VEGA20)
> 
> Something is seriously wrong here.
> 
> Upstream commit goes to soc15_need_reset_on_init() and creates dead
> variable and quite a bit of dead code. Is that intended?
> 
> But this stable version... goes to different function, and returns
> false in function returning 0/-EINVAL, simulating success. New place
> does not seem right; it seems like patch misplaced it.

Ah, good catch!  This happened in the 4.14.y tree, so I had to drop the
patch from there, for some reason I missed checking the 4.19.y backport
(I had validated that 5.1.y got it right.)

Now dropped from the queue, thanks!

greg k-h