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: <a602603b-e075-46a1-a4bf-3653954faa08@amd.com> Date: Tue, 10 Jun 2025 16:20:53 -0500 From: "Bowman, Terry" <terry.bowman@....com> To: Lukas Wunner <lukas@...ner.de> Cc: dave@...olabs.net, jonathan.cameron@...wei.com, dave.jiang@...el.com, alison.schofield@...el.com, vishal.l.verma@...el.com, ira.weiny@...el.com, dan.j.williams@...el.com, bhelgaas@...gle.com, bp@...en8.de, ming.li@...omail.com, shiju.jose@...wei.com, dan.carpenter@...aro.org, Smita.KoralahalliChannabasappa@....com, kobayashi.da-06@...itsu.com, rrichter@....com, peterz@...radead.org, fabio.m.de.francesco@...ux.intel.com, ilpo.jarvinen@...ux.intel.com, yazen.ghannam@....com, linux-cxl@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-pci@...r.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH v9 04/16] PCI/AER: Dequeue forwarded CXL error On 6/10/2025 1:07 PM, Bowman, Terry wrote: > > On 6/9/2025 11:15 PM, Lukas Wunner wrote: >> On Tue, Jun 03, 2025 at 12:22:27PM -0500, Terry Bowman wrote: >>> --- a/drivers/cxl/core/ras.c >>> +++ b/drivers/cxl/core/ras.c >>> +static int cxl_rch_handle_error_iter(struct pci_dev *pdev, void *data) >>> +{ >>> + struct cxl_prot_error_info *err_info = data; >>> + struct pci_dev *pdev_ref __free(pci_dev_put) = pci_dev_get(pdev); >>> + struct cxl_dev_state *cxlds; >>> + >>> + /* >>> + * The capability, status, and control fields in Device 0, >>> + * Function 0 DVSEC control the CXL functionality of the >>> + * entire device (CXL 3.0, 8.1.3). >>> + */ >>> + if (pdev->devfn != PCI_DEVFN(0, 0)) >>> + return 0; >>> + >>> + /* >>> + * CXL Memory Devices must have the 502h class code set (CXL >>> + * 3.0, 8.1.12.1). >>> + */ >>> + if ((pdev->class >> 8) != PCI_CLASS_MEMORY_CXL) >>> + return 0; >>> + >>> + if (!is_cxl_memdev(&pdev->dev) || !pdev->dev.driver) >>> + return 0; >> Is the point of the "!pdev->dev.driver" check to ascertain that >> pdev is bound to cxl_pci_driver? >> >> If so, you need to check "if (pdev->driver != &cxl_pci_driver)" >> directly (like cxl_handle_cper_event() does). >> >> That's because there are drivers which may bind to *any* PCI device, >> e.g. vfio_pci_driver. >> >> Thanks, >> >> Lukas > Good point. I'm adding this change. Thanks Lukas. > > -Terry Hi Lukas, Looking closer to implement this change I find the cxl_pci_driver is defined static in cxl/pci.c and is unavailable to reference in cxl/core/ras.c as-is. Would you like me to export cxl_pci_driver to make available for this check? The existing class code check guarantees it is a CXL EP. Is it not safe to expect it is bound to a the CXL driver? -Terry
Powered by blists - more mailing lists