linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] nvme: validate cntlid's only for nvme >= 1.1.0

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20200630140845.GA1987534@dhcp-10-100-145-180.wdl.wdc.com>
Date:   Tue, 30 Jun 2020 07:08:45 -0700
From:   Keith Busch <kbusch@...nel.org>
To:     Maximilian Heyne <mheyne@...zon.de>
Cc:     Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>, Amit Shah <aams@...zon.de>,
        stable@...r.kernel.org, Jens Axboe <axboe@...com>,
        Sagi Grimberg <sagi@...mberg.me>,
        linux-nvme@...ts.infradead.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] nvme: validate cntlid's only for nvme >= 1.1.0

On Tue, Jun 30, 2020 at 04:01:45PM +0200, Maximilian Heyne wrote:
> On 6/30/20 3:36 PM, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> > And actually - 1.0 did not have the concept of a subsystem.  So having
> > a duplicate serial number for a 1.0 controller actually is a pretty
> > nasty bug.  Can you point me to this broken controller?  Do you think
> > the OEM could fix it up to report a proper version number and controller
> > ID?
> > 
> 
> I meant that the VF NVMe controllers will all land in the same subsystem from
> the kernel's point of view, because, as you said, there was no idea of different
> subsystems in the 1.0 spec.

Each controller should have landed in its own subsystem in this case
rather than the same subsystem.

> It's an older in-house controller. Seems to set the same serial number for all
> VF's. Should the firmware set unique serials for the VF's instead?

Yes, the driver shouldn't be finding duplicate serial numbers.