linux-kernel - Re: I/O page faults from 8250_mid PCIe UART after TIOCVHANGUP

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: <d5bc5b97-25db-d70-17dc-aab49f8fbc77@linux.intel.com>
Date:   Mon, 19 Sep 2022 17:19:35 +0300 (EEST)
From:   Ilpo Järvinen <ilpo.jarvinen@...ux.intel.com>
To:     Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com>
cc:     Lennert Buytenhek <buytenh@...tstofly.org>,
        Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
        Jiri Slaby <jirislaby@...nel.org>,
        linux-serial <linux-serial@...r.kernel.org>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: I/O page faults from 8250_mid PCIe UART after TIOCVHANGUP

On Mon, 19 Sep 2022, Andy Shevchenko wrote:

> On Fri, Sep 16, 2022 at 02:47:08PM +0300, Lennert Buytenhek wrote:
> > On Thu, Sep 15, 2022 at 07:27:45PM +0300, Ilpo Järvinen wrote:
> 
> ...
> 
> > Thanks for the fix!
> > 
> > > [...] I'm far from sure if it's the 
> > > best fix though as I don't fully understand what causes the faults during 
> > > the THRE tests because the port->irq is disabled by the THRE test block.
> > 
> > If the IRQ hasn't been set up yet, the UART will have zeroes in its MSI
> > address/data registers.  Disabling the IRQ at the interrupt controller
> > won't stop the UART from performing a DMA write to the address programmed
> > in its MSI address register (zero) when it wants to signal an interrupt.
> > 
> > (These UARTs (in Ice Lake-D) implement PCI 2.1 style MSI without masking
> > capability, so there is no way to mask the interrupt at the source PCI
> > function level, except disabling the MSI capability entirely, but that
> > would cause it to fall back to INTx# assertion, and the PCI specification
> > prohibits disabling the MSI capability as a way to mask a function's
> > interrupt service request.)
> 
> This sounds to me like a good part to be injected into commit message of
> the proposed fix.

I added my own wording already but I could adds of Lennert's far superior 
descriptions verbatim if he is OK with that?


-- 
 i.