linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] pci: irq: Add an early parameter to limit pci irq numbers

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <ZG4rZYBKaWrsctuH@bhelgaas>
Date:   Wed, 24 May 2023 10:21:09 -0500
From:   Bjorn Helgaas <helgaas@...nel.org>
To:     Huacai Chen <chenhuacai@...ngson.cn>
Cc:     Bjorn Helgaas <bhelgaas@...gle.com>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
        "Ahmed S . Darwish" <darwi@...utronix.de>,
        Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@...pe.ca>,
        Kevin Tian <kevin.tian@...el.com>, linux-pci@...r.kernel.org,
        Jianmin Lv <lvjianmin@...ngson.cn>,
        Huacai Chen <chenhuacai@...il.com>,
        Jiaxun Yang <jiaxun.yang@...goat.com>,
        loongson-kernel@...ts.loongnix.cn,
        Juxin Gao <gaojuxin@...ngson.cn>,
        Marc Zyngier <maz@...nel.org>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] pci: irq: Add an early parameter to limit pci irq numbers

[+cc Marc, LKML]

On Wed, May 24, 2023 at 05:36:23PM +0800, Huacai Chen wrote:
> Some platforms (such as LoongArch) cannot provide enough irq numbers as
> many as logical cpu numbers. So we should limit pci irq numbers when
> allocate msi/msix vectors, otherwise some device drivers may fail at
> initialization. This patch add a cmdline parameter "pci_irq_limit=xxxx"
> to control the limit.
> 
> The default pci msi/msix number limit is defined 32 for LoongArch and
> NR_IRQS for other platforms.

The IRQ experts can chime in on this, but this doesn't feel right to
me.  I assume arch code should set things up so only valid IRQ numbers
can be allocated.  This doesn't seem necessarily PCI-specific, I'd
prefer to avoid an arch #ifdef here, and I'd also prefer to avoid a
command-line parameter that users have to discover and supply.

> Signed-off-by: Juxin Gao <gaojuxin@...ngson.cn>
> Signed-off-by: Huacai Chen <chenhuacai@...ngson.cn>
> ---
>  drivers/pci/msi/msi.c | 26 +++++++++++++++++++++++++-
>  1 file changed, 25 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/pci/msi/msi.c b/drivers/pci/msi/msi.c
> index ef1d8857a51b..6617381e50e7 100644
> --- a/drivers/pci/msi/msi.c
> +++ b/drivers/pci/msi/msi.c
> @@ -402,12 +402,34 @@ static int msi_capability_init(struct pci_dev *dev, int nvec,
>  	return ret;
>  }
>  
> +#ifdef CONFIG_LOONGARCH
> +#define DEFAULT_PCI_IRQ_LIMITS 32
> +#else
> +#define DEFAULT_PCI_IRQ_LIMITS NR_IRQS
> +#endif
> +
> +static int pci_irq_limits = DEFAULT_PCI_IRQ_LIMITS;
> +
> +static int __init pci_irq_limit(char *str)
> +{
> +	get_option(&str, &pci_irq_limits);
> +
> +	if (pci_irq_limits == 0)
> +		pci_irq_limits = DEFAULT_PCI_IRQ_LIMITS;
> +
> +	return 0;
> +}
> +
> +early_param("pci_irq_limit", pci_irq_limit);
> +
>  int __pci_enable_msi_range(struct pci_dev *dev, int minvec, int maxvec,
>  			   struct irq_affinity *affd)
>  {
>  	int nvec;
>  	int rc;
>  
> +	maxvec = clamp_val(maxvec, 0, pci_irq_limits);
> +
>  	if (!pci_msi_supported(dev, minvec) || dev->current_state != PCI_D0)
>  		return -EINVAL;
>  
> @@ -776,7 +798,9 @@ static bool pci_msix_validate_entries(struct pci_dev *dev, struct msix_entry *en
>  int __pci_enable_msix_range(struct pci_dev *dev, struct msix_entry *entries, int minvec,
>  			    int maxvec, struct irq_affinity *affd, int flags)
>  {
> -	int hwsize, rc, nvec = maxvec;
> +	int hwsize, rc, nvec;
> +
> +	nvec = clamp_val(maxvec, 0, pci_irq_limits);
>  
>  	if (maxvec < minvec)
>  		return -ERANGE;
> -- 
> 2.39.1
>