linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 1/3] PCI/DPC: Request DPC only if also requesting AER

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: <dfc9692b-1a9a-4d53-9e3e-33b2e88d0d37@linux.intel.com>
Date: Mon, 26 Feb 2024 07:46:05 -0800
From: Kuppuswamy Sathyanarayanan <sathyanarayanan.kuppuswamy@...ux.intel.com>
To: Bjorn Helgaas <helgaas@...nel.org>
Cc: linux-pci@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
 Matthew W Carlis <mattc@...estorage.com>, Keith Busch <kbusch@...nel.org>,
 Lukas Wunner <lukas@...ner.de>,
 Mika Westerberg <mika.westerberg@...ux.intel.com>,
 Jesse Brandeburg <jesse.brandeburg@...el.com>,
 Bjorn Helgaas <bhelgaas@...gle.com>, stable@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/3] PCI/DPC: Request DPC only if also requesting AER


On 2/26/24 7:18 AM, Bjorn Helgaas wrote:
> On Sun, Feb 25, 2024 at 11:46:07AM -0800, Kuppuswamy Sathyanarayanan wrote:
>> On 2/22/24 2:15 PM, Bjorn Helgaas wrote:
>>> From: Bjorn Helgaas <bhelgaas@...gle.com>
>>>
>>> When booting with "pci=noaer", we don't request control of AER, but we
>>> previously *did* request control of DPC, as in the dmesg log attached at
>>> the bugzilla below:
>>>
>>>   Command line: ... pci=noaer
>>>   acpi PNP0A08:00: _OSC: OS supports [ExtendedConfig ASPM ClockPM Segments MSI EDR HPX-Type3]
>>>   acpi PNP0A08:00: _OSC: OS now controls [PCIeHotplug SHPCHotplug PME PCIeCapability LTR DPC]
>>>
>>> That's illegal per PCI Firmware Spec, r3.3, sec 4.5.1, table 4-5, which
>>> says:
>>>
>>>   If the operating system sets this bit [OSC_PCI_EXPRESS_DPC_CONTROL], it
>>>   must also set bit 7 of the Support field (indicating support for Error
>>>   Disconnect Recover notifications) and bits 3 and 4 of the Control field
>>>   (requesting control of PCI Express Advanced Error Reporting and the PCI
>>>   Express Capability Structure).
>> IIUC, this dependency is discussed in sec 4.5.2.4. "Dependencies
>> Between _OSC Control Bits".
>>
>> Because handling of Downstream Port Containment has a dependency on
>> Advanced Error Reporting, the operating system is required to
>> request control over Advanced Error Reporting (bit 3 of the Control
>> field) while requesting control over Downstream Port Containment
>> Configuration (bit 7 of the Control field). If the operating system
>> attempts to claim control of Downstream Port Containment
>> Configuration without also claiming control over Advanced Error
>> Reporting, firmware is required to refuse control of the feature
>> being illegally claimed and mask the corresponding bit.  Firmware is
>> required to maintain ownership of Advanced Error Reporting if it
>> retains ownership of Downstream Port Containment Configuration.  If
>> the operating system sets bit 7 of the Control field, it must set
>> bit 7 of the Support field, indicating support for the Error
>> Disconnect Recover event.
> So I guess you're suggesting that there are two defects here?
>
>   1) Linux requested DPC control without requesting AER control.
>
>   2) Platform granted DPC control when it shouldn't have.
>
> I do agree with that, but obviously we can only fix 1) in Linux.

Sorry, maybe my comment was not clear. I was just suggesting
to change the  spec reference from r3.3, sec 4.5.1, table 4-5
to  r3.3, sec 4.5.2.4 "Dependencies Between _OSC Control Bits". I agree that we cannot do much if firmware misbehaves here.

>>> Request DPC control only if we have also requested AER control.
>>>
>>> Fixes: ac1c8e35a326 ("PCI/DPC: Add Error Disconnect Recover (EDR) support")
>>> Link: https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=218491#c12
>>> Signed-off-by: Bjorn Helgaas <bhelgaas@...gle.com>
>>> Cc: <stable@...r.kernel.org>	# v5.7+
>>> Cc: Kuppuswamy Sathyanarayanan <sathyanarayanan.kuppuswamy@...ux.intel.com>
>>> Cc: Matthew W Carlis <mattc@...estorage.com>
>>> Cc: Keith Busch <kbusch@...nel.org>
>>> Cc: Lukas Wunner <lukas@...ner.de>
>>> Cc: Mika Westerberg <mika.westerberg@...ux.intel.com>
>>> Cc: Jesse Brandeburg <jesse.brandeburg@...el.com>
>>> ---
>> Code wise it looks fine to me.
>>
>> Reviewed-by: Kuppuswamy Sathyanarayanan <sathyanarayanan.kuppuswamy@...ux.intel.com>
>>>  drivers/acpi/pci_root.c | 20 +++++++++++---------
>>>  1 file changed, 11 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/drivers/acpi/pci_root.c b/drivers/acpi/pci_root.c
>>> index 58b89b8d950e..efc292b6214e 100644
>>> --- a/drivers/acpi/pci_root.c
>>> +++ b/drivers/acpi/pci_root.c
>>> @@ -518,17 +518,19 @@ static u32 calculate_control(void)
>>>  	if (IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_HOTPLUG_PCI_SHPC))
>>>  		control |= OSC_PCI_SHPC_NATIVE_HP_CONTROL;
>>>  
>>> -	if (pci_aer_available())
>>> +	if (pci_aer_available()) {
>>>  		control |= OSC_PCI_EXPRESS_AER_CONTROL;
>>>  
>>> -	/*
>>> -	 * Per the Downstream Port Containment Related Enhancements ECN to
>>> -	 * the PCI Firmware Spec, r3.2, sec 4.5.1, table 4-5,
>>> -	 * OSC_PCI_EXPRESS_DPC_CONTROL indicates the OS supports both DPC
>>> -	 * and EDR.
>>> -	 */
>>> -	if (IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_PCIE_DPC) && IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_PCIE_EDR))
>>> -		control |= OSC_PCI_EXPRESS_DPC_CONTROL;
>>> +		/*
>>> +		 * Per PCI Firmware Spec, r3.3, sec 4.5.1, table 4-5, the
>>> +		 * OS can request DPC control only if it has advertised
>>> +		 * OSC_PCI_EDR_SUPPORT and requested both
>>> +		 * OSC_PCI_EXPRESS_CAPABILITY_CONTROL and
>>> +		 * OSC_PCI_EXPRESS_AER_CONTROL.
>>> +		 */
>>> +		if (IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_PCIE_DPC))
>>> +			control |= OSC_PCI_EXPRESS_DPC_CONTROL;
>>> +	}
>>>  
>>>  	return control;
>>>  }
>> -- 
>> Sathyanarayanan Kuppuswamy
>> Linux Kernel Developer
>>
-- 
Sathyanarayanan Kuppuswamy
Linux Kernel Developer