linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 04/18] EDAC/amd64: Remove PCI Function 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] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Wed, 11 May 2022 12:34:58 +0200
From:   Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>
To:     Yazen Ghannam <yazen.ghannam@....com>
Cc:     linux-edac@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        Smita.KoralahalliChannabasappa@....com, muralidhara.mk@....com,
        naveenkrishna.chatradhi@....com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 04/18] EDAC/amd64: Remove PCI Function 0

On Mon, May 09, 2022 at 02:55:20PM +0000, Yazen Ghannam wrote:
> @@ -3287,26 +3276,12 @@ static void decode_umc_error(int node_id, struct mce *m)
>  /*
>   * Use pvt->F3 which contains the F3 CPU PCI device to get the related
>   * F1 (AddrMap) and F2 (Dct) devices. Return negative value on error.
> - * Reserve F0 on systems with a UMC.
>   */
>  static int
>  reserve_mc_sibling_devs(struct amd64_pvt *pvt, u16 pci_id1, u16 pci_id2)
>  {
> -	if (pvt->umc) {
> -		pvt->F0 = pci_get_related_function(pvt->F3->vendor, pci_id1, pvt->F3);
> -		if (!pvt->F0) {
> -			edac_dbg(1, "F0 not found, device 0x%x\n", pci_id1);
> -			return -ENODEV;
> -		}
> -
> -		if (!pci_ctl_dev)
> -			pci_ctl_dev = &pvt->F0->dev;
> -
> -		edac_dbg(1, "F0: %s\n", pci_name(pvt->F0));
> -		edac_dbg(1, "F3: %s\n", pci_name(pvt->F3));
> -
> +	if (pvt->umc)

I don't like the sprinkling of those checks everywhere. And
hw_info_get() has those checks too. I think it would be cleaner if
hw_info_get() would call a df-specific function for fam 0x17 and later
and do the setup there cleanly:

hw_info_get:

	if (pvt->fam >= 0x17)
		return hw_info_get_df(pvt);

and so on.

Btw, I completely agree with leaving the old code as it is.

And I obviously like the code removal, ofc.

:-)

-- 
Regards/Gruss,
    Boris.

https://people.kernel.org/tglx/notes-about-netiquette