| 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
| ||
|
Message-ID: <Y4jIlte0qPbCJNFE@iweiny-desk3>
Date: Thu, 1 Dec 2022 07:30:30 -0800
From: Ira Weiny <ira.weiny@...el.com>
To: Jonathan Cameron <Jonathan.Cameron@...wei.com>
CC: Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@...el.com>,
Alison Schofield <alison.schofield@...el.com>,
Vishal Verma <vishal.l.verma@...el.com>,
"Ben Widawsky" <bwidawsk@...nel.org>,
Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
Davidlohr Bueso <dave@...olabs.net>,
Dave Jiang <dave.jiang@...el.com>,
<linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, <linux-cxl@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH V2 03/11] cxl/mem: Implement Clear Event Records command
On Thu, Dec 01, 2022 at 01:26:18PM +0000, Jonathan Cameron wrote:
> On Wed, 30 Nov 2022 16:27:11 -0800
> ira.weiny@...el.com wrote:
>
> > From: Ira Weiny <ira.weiny@...el.com>
> >
> > CXL rev 3.0 section 8.2.9.2.3 defines the Clear Event Records mailbox
> > command. After an event record is read it needs to be cleared from the
> > event log.
> >
> > Implement cxl_clear_event_record() to clear all record retrieved from
> > the device.
> >
> > Each record is cleared explicitly. A clear all bit is specified but
> > events could arrive between a get and any final clear all operation.
> > This means events would be missed.
> > Therefore each event is cleared specifically.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Ira Weiny <ira.weiny@...el.com>
> I think there is a type issue on the min_t() calculation with that addressed
> this looks good to me.
>
> Reviewed-by: Jonathan Cameron <Jonathan.Cameron@...wei.com>
>
> >
> > ---
> > Changes from V1:
> > Clear Event Record allows for u8 handles while Get Event Record
> > allows for u16 records to be returned. Based on Jonathan's
> > feedback; allow for all event records to be handled in this
> > clear. Which means a double loop with potentially multiple
> > Clear Event payloads being sent to clear all events sent.
> >
> > Changes from RFC:
> > Jonathan
> > Clean up init of payload and use return code.
> > Also report any error to clear the event.
> > s/v3.0/rev 3.0
> > ---
> > drivers/cxl/core/mbox.c | 61 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-----
> > drivers/cxl/cxlmem.h | 14 +++++++++
> > include/uapi/linux/cxl_mem.h | 1 +
> > 3 files changed, 69 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/cxl/core/mbox.c b/drivers/cxl/core/mbox.c
> > index 70b681027a3d..076a3df0ba38 100644
> > --- a/drivers/cxl/core/mbox.c
> > +++ b/drivers/cxl/core/mbox.c
> > @@ -52,6 +52,7 @@ static struct cxl_mem_command cxl_mem_commands[CXL_MEM_COMMAND_ID_MAX] = {
> > #endif
> > CXL_CMD(GET_SUPPORTED_LOGS, 0, CXL_VARIABLE_PAYLOAD, CXL_CMD_FLAG_FORCE_ENABLE),
> > CXL_CMD(GET_EVENT_RECORD, 1, CXL_VARIABLE_PAYLOAD, 0),
> > + CXL_CMD(CLEAR_EVENT_RECORD, CXL_VARIABLE_PAYLOAD, 0, 0),
> > CXL_CMD(GET_FW_INFO, 0, 0x50, 0),
> > CXL_CMD(GET_PARTITION_INFO, 0, 0x20, 0),
> > CXL_CMD(GET_LSA, 0x8, CXL_VARIABLE_PAYLOAD, 0),
> > @@ -708,6 +709,42 @@ int cxl_enumerate_cmds(struct cxl_dev_state *cxlds)
> > }
> > EXPORT_SYMBOL_NS_GPL(cxl_enumerate_cmds, CXL);
> >
> > +static int cxl_clear_event_record(struct cxl_dev_state *cxlds,
> > + enum cxl_event_log_type log,
> > + struct cxl_get_event_payload *get_pl,
> > + u16 total)
> > +{
> > + struct cxl_mbox_clear_event_payload payload = {
> > + .event_log = log,
> > + };
> > + int cnt;
> > +
> > + /*
> > + * Clear Event Records uses u8 for the handle cnt while Get Event
> > + * Record can return up to 0xffff records.
> > + */
> > + for (cnt = 0; cnt < total; /* cnt incremented internally */) {
> > + u8 nr_recs = min_t(u8, (total - cnt),
> > + CXL_CLEAR_EVENT_MAX_HANDLES);
>
> I might be half asleep but isn't this assuming that (total - cnt)
> fits in an u8? Shouldn't this be min_t(u16, ..)
This cast will ensure the value is never out of range for nr_recs which needs
to be u8 and (total - cnt) will never be negative.
But now you have me double thinking myself.
> Also, maybe u16 cnt would be simpler.
>
> Hmm. This is safe but only because of how you call it alongside
> handling of a particular Get event records response (which must
> have fitted in the mailbox and has a longer header).
>
> Looking at this function in isolation, I think the mailbox could be
> small enough that we might not fit 255 records + the header.
> Perhaps we need a comment to say that, or at minimum a check and error
> return if it won't fit?
I did not realize that Payload Size applied to input payloads as well. :-/
There is no check in the send command for that ATM. Looking at the spec I
think you are right.
I'll further limit the payload size here too.
And with this I might get rid of the min_t() and just cap based on that value.
>
> > + int i, rc;
> > +
> > + for (i = 0; i < nr_recs; i++, cnt++) {
> > + payload.handle[i] = get_pl->records[cnt].hdr.handle;
> > + dev_dbg(cxlds->dev, "Event log '%s': Clearning %u\n",
> > + cxl_event_log_type_str(log),
> > + le16_to_cpu(payload.handle[i]));
> > + }
> > + payload.nr_recs = nr_recs;
> > +
> > + rc = cxl_mbox_send_cmd(cxlds, CXL_MBOX_OP_CLEAR_EVENT_RECORD,
> > + &payload, sizeof(payload), NULL, 0);
> > + if (rc)
> > + return rc;
> > + }
> > +
> > + return 0;
> > +}
> > +
> > static void cxl_mem_get_records_log(struct cxl_dev_state *cxlds,
> > enum cxl_event_log_type type)
> > {
> > @@ -732,13 +769,22 @@ static void cxl_mem_get_records_log(struct cxl_dev_state *cxlds,
> This feels miss named now but I can't immediately think of better naming so on that
> basis fine to leave it as is if you don't have a better idea!.
So we leave it. Naming is hard! :-D
Thanks for the quick review, V3 coming ASAP.
Ira
Powered by blists - more mailing lists