linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v11 05/14] s390/vfio-ap: implement in-use callback for 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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <62a22a99-3485-353c-b4e5-e04fcec57778@linux.ibm.com>
Date:   Mon, 23 Nov 2020 14:23:06 -0500
From:   Tony Krowiak <akrowiak@...ux.ibm.com>
To:     Cornelia Huck <cohuck@...hat.com>,
        Halil Pasic <pasic@...ux.ibm.com>
Cc:     linux-s390@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        kvm@...r.kernel.org, freude@...ux.ibm.com, borntraeger@...ibm.com,
        mjrosato@...ux.ibm.com, alex.williamson@...hat.com,
        kwankhede@...dia.com, fiuczy@...ux.ibm.com, frankja@...ux.ibm.com,
        david@...hat.com, hca@...ux.ibm.com, gor@...ux.ibm.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v11 05/14] s390/vfio-ap: implement in-use callback for
 vfio_ap driver



On 11/23/20 12:03 PM, Cornelia Huck wrote:
> On Sat, 14 Nov 2020 00:47:22 +0100
> Halil Pasic <pasic@...ux.ibm.com> wrote:
>
>> On Fri, 13 Nov 2020 12:14:22 -0500
>> Tony Krowiak <akrowiak@...ux.ibm.com> wrote:
>> [..]
>>>>>    }
>>>>>    
>>>>> +#define MDEV_SHARING_ERR "Userspace may not re-assign queue %02lx.%04lx " \
>>>>> +			 "already assigned to %s"
>>>>> +
>>>>> +static void vfio_ap_mdev_log_sharing_err(const char *mdev_name,
>>>>> +					 unsigned long *apm,
>>>>> +					 unsigned long *aqm)
>>>>> +{
>>>>> +	unsigned long apid, apqi;
>>>>> +
>>>>> +	for_each_set_bit_inv(apid, apm, AP_DEVICES)
>>>>> +		for_each_set_bit_inv(apqi, aqm, AP_DOMAINS)
>>>>> +			pr_err(MDEV_SHARING_ERR, apid, apqi, mdev_name);
>>>> Isn't error rather severe for this? For my taste even warning would be
>>>> severe for this.
>>> The user only sees a EADDRINUSE returned from the sysfs interface,
>>> so Conny asked if I could log a message to indicate which APQNs are
>>> in use by which mdev. I can change this to an info message, but it
>>> will be missed if the log level is set higher. Maybe Conny can put in
>>> her two cents here since she asked for this.
>>>    
>> I'm looking forward to Conny's opinion. :)
> (only just saw this; -ETOOMANYEMAILS)
>
> It is probably not an error in the sense of "things are broken, this
> cannot work"; but I'd consider this at least a warning "this does not
> work as you intended".

Okay then, I'll make it a warning.

>