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: <336b3084-dfae-4e91-ba31-7e08ba4e5591@oracle.com>
Date:   Mon, 4 Dec 2023 18:05:27 +0000
From:   John Garry <john.g.garry@...cle.com>
To:     Xingui Yang <yangxingui@...wei.com>, yanaijie@...wei.com,
        jejb@...ux.ibm.com, martin.petersen@...cle.com,
        damien.lemoal@...nsource.wdc.com
Cc:     linux-scsi@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        linuxarm@...wei.com, prime.zeng@...ilicon.com,
        chenxiang66@...ilicon.com, kangfenglong@...wei.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 3/3] scsi: libsas: Fix the failure of adding phy with
 zero-address to port

On 04/12/2023 12:29, Xingui Yang wrote:
> When the expander device which attached many SATA disks is connected to
> the host, first disable and then enable the local phy. The following BUG()
> will be triggered with a small probability:
> 
> [562240.051046] sas: phy19 part of wide port with phy16

Please use code from latest kernel. This again seems to be the old 
comment format.

> [562240.051197] sas: ex 500e004aaaaaaa1f phy19:U:0 attached: 0000000000000000 (no device)

The log at 562240.051046 tells that phy19 formed a wideport with phy16, 
but then here we see that phy19 has attached SAS address 0. How did we 
form a wideport with a phy with sas address 0? Sorry if I asked this 
before, but I looked through the thread and it is not clear.

> [562240.051203] sas: done REVALIDATING DOMAIN on port 0, pid:435909, res 0x0
> <...>
> [562240.062536] sas: ex 500e004aaaaaaa1f phy0 new device attached
> [562240.062616] sas: ex 500e004aaaaaaa1f phy00:U:5 attached: 0000000000000000 (stp)
> [562240.062680]  port-7:7:0: trying to add phy phy-7:7:19 fails: it's already part of another port
> [562240.085064] ------------[ cut here ]------------
> [562240.096612] kernel BUG at drivers/scsi/scsi_transport_sas.c:1083!
> [562240.109611] Internal error: Oops - BUG: 0 [#1] SMP
> [562240.343518] Process kworker/u256:3 (pid: 435909, stack limit = 0x0000000003bcbebf)
> [562240.421714] Workqueue: 0000:b4:02.0_disco_q sas_revalidate_domain [libsas]
> [562240.437173] pstate: 40c00009 (nZcv daif +PAN +UAO)
> [562240.450478] pc : sas_port_add_phy+0x13c/0x168 [scsi_transport_sas]
> [562240.465283] lr : sas_port_add_phy+0x13c/0x168 [scsi_transport_sas]
> [562240.479751] sp : ffff0000300cfa70
> [562240.674822] Call trace:
> [562240.682709]  sas_port_add_phy+0x13c/0x168 [scsi_transport_sas]
> [562240.694013]  sas_ex_get_linkrate.isra.5+0xcc/0x128 [libsas]
> [562240.704957]  sas_ex_discover_end_dev+0xfc/0x538 [libsas]
> [562240.715508]  sas_ex_discover_dev+0x3cc/0x4b8 [libsas]
> [562240.725634]  sas_ex_discover_devices+0x9c/0x1a8 [libsas]
> [562240.735855]  sas_ex_revalidate_domain+0x2f0/0x450 [libsas]
> [562240.746123]  sas_revalidate_domain+0x158/0x160 [libsas]
> [562240.756014]  process_one_work+0x1b4/0x448
> [562240.764548]  worker_thread+0x54/0x468
> [562240.772562]  kthread+0x134/0x138
> [562240.779989]  ret_from_fork+0x10/0x18
> 
> What causes this problem:
> 1. For phy19, when the phy is attached and added to the parent wide port,
> the path is:
> sas_rediscover()
>      ->sas_discover_new()
>          ->sas_ex_discover_devices()
>              ->sas_ex_discover_dev()
>                  -> sas_add_parent_port()
> 
> ex_phy->port was not set and when it is removed from parent wide port the
> path is:
> sas_rediscover()
>      ->sas_unregister_devs_sas_addr()


Sorry, but that is not a callpath. Maybe you condensed it. Please expand it.

> 
> Then the sas address of phy19 becomes 0, and since ex_phy->port is NULL,
> phy19 was not removed from the parent wide port's phy_list.
> 
> 2. For phy0, it is connected to a new sata device and the path is:
> sas_rediscover()
>      ->sas_discover_new()->sas_ex_phy_discover()
>                              ->sas_ex_phy_discover_helper()
>                                  ->sas_set_ex_phy()
>                          ->sas_ex_discover_devices()
>                              ->sas_ex_discover_dev()
>                                  ->sas_ex_discover_end_dev()
>                                      ->sas_port_alloc() // Create port-7:7:0
>                                      ->sas_ex_get_linkrate()
>                                          ->sas_port_add_phy()
> 
> The type of the newly connected device is stp, but the linkrate is 5 which
> less than 1.5G, then the sas address is set to 0 in sas_set_ex_phy().

I don't understand why we do anything when in this state. linkrate == 5 
means phy reset in progress. Can we just bail out until the SATA phy is 
in a decent shape? I assume that when the SATA phy is in "up" state that 
we get a broadcast event and can re-evaluate.

> Subsequently, a new port port-7:7:0 was created and tried to add phy19 with
> the same zero-address to this new port. However, phy19 still belongs to
> another port, then a BUG() was triggered in sas_ex_get_linkrate().
> 
> Fix the problem as follows:
> 1. Use sas_port_add_ex_phy() instead of sas_port_add_phy() when ex_phy is
> added to the parent port.

this seems ok

> 
> 2. Set ex_dev->parent_port to NULL when the number of phy on the port
> becomes 0.
> 
> 3. When phy->attached_dev_type != NO_DEVICE, do not set the zero address
> for phy->attached_sas_addr.
> 
> Fixes: 2908d778ab3e ("[SCSI] aic94xx: new driver")
> Fixes: 7d1d86518118 ("[SCSI] libsas: fix false positive 'device attached' conditions")
> Signed-off-by: Xingui Yang <yangxingui@...wei.com>
> ---
>   drivers/scsi/libsas/sas_expander.c | 10 ++++++----
>   1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/scsi/libsas/sas_expander.c b/drivers/scsi/libsas/sas_expander.c
> index 7aa968b85e1e..9152152d5e10 100644
> --- a/drivers/scsi/libsas/sas_expander.c
> +++ b/drivers/scsi/libsas/sas_expander.c
> @@ -45,7 +45,7 @@ static void sas_add_parent_port(struct domain_device *dev, int phy_id)
>   		BUG_ON(sas_port_add(ex->parent_port));
>   		sas_port_mark_backlink(ex->parent_port);
>   	}
> -	sas_port_add_phy(ex->parent_port, ex_phy->phy);
> +	sas_port_add_ex_phy(ex->parent_port, ex_phy);
>   }
>   
>   /* ---------- SMP task management ---------- */
> @@ -261,8 +261,7 @@ static void sas_set_ex_phy(struct domain_device *dev, int phy_id,
>   	/* help some expanders that fail to zero sas_address in the 'no
>   	 * device' case
>   	 */

Please pay attention to this comment. It seems that some expanders 
require us to explicitly zero the SAS address.

> -	if (phy->attached_dev_type == SAS_PHY_UNUSED ||
> -	    phy->linkrate < SAS_LINK_RATE_1_5_GBPS)
> +	if (phy->attached_dev_type == SAS_PHY_UNUSED)
>   		memset(phy->attached_sas_addr, 0, SAS_ADDR_SIZE);
>   	else
>   		memcpy(phy->attached_sas_addr, dr->attached_sas_addr, SAS_ADDR_SIZE);
> @@ -1864,9 +1863,12 @@ static void sas_unregister_devs_sas_addr(struct domain_device *parent,
>   	if (phy->port) {
>   		sas_port_delete_phy(phy->port, phy->phy);
>   		sas_device_set_phy(found, phy->port);
> -		if (phy->port->num_phys == 0)
> +		if (phy->port->num_phys == 0) {
>   			list_add_tail(&phy->port->del_list,
>   				&parent->port->sas_port_del_list);
> +			if (ex_dev->parent_port == phy->port)
> +				ex_dev->parent_port = NULL;

This does not feel like the right place to do this. So the port which we 
queue to free is the ex_dev->parent_port, right?

BTW, do you know why it's called ex_dev->parent_port and not 
ex_dev->port? I find the name parent_port confusing...

Thanks,
John

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ