linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 05/23] PCI: Remove old_size limit from bridge window sizing

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: <20260126171601.GA249217@bhelgaas>
Date: Mon, 26 Jan 2026 11:16:01 -0600
From: Bjorn Helgaas <helgaas@...nel.org>
To: Ilpo Järvinen <ilpo.jarvinen@...ux.intel.com>
Cc: linux-pci@...r.kernel.org, Bjorn Helgaas <bhelgaas@...gle.com>,
	Dominik Brodowski <linux@...inikbrodowski.net>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	Simon Richter <Simon.Richter@...yros.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 05/23] PCI: Remove old_size limit from bridge window
 sizing

On Fri, Dec 19, 2025 at 07:40:18PM +0200, Ilpo Järvinen wrote:
> calculate_memsize() applies lower bound to the resource size before
> aligning the resource size making it impossible to shrink bridge window
> resources. I've not found any justification for this lower bound and
> nothing indicated it was to work around some HW issue.
> 
> Prior to the commit 3baeae36039a ("PCI: Use pci_release_resource()
> instead of release_resource()"), releasing a bridge window during BAR
> resize resulted in clearing start and end address of the resource.
> Clearing addresses destroys the resource size as a side-effect,
> therefore nullifying the effect of the old size lower bound.
> 
> After the commit 3baeae36039a ("PCI: Use pci_release_resource() instead
> of release_resource()"), BAR resize uses the aligned old size, which
> results in exceeding what fits into the parent window in some cases:
> 
> xe 0030:03:00.0: [drm] Attempting to resize bar from 256MiB -> 16384MiB
> xe 0030:03:00.0: BAR 0 [mem 0x620c000000000-0x620c000ffffff 64bit]: releasing
> xe 0030:03:00.0: BAR 2 [mem 0x6200000000000-0x620000fffffff 64bit pref]: releasing
> pci 0030:02:01.0: bridge window [mem 0x6200000000000-0x620001fffffff 64bit pref]: releasing
> pci 0030:01:00.0: bridge window [mem 0x6200000000000-0x6203fbff0ffff 64bit pref]: releasing
> pci 0030:00:00.0: bridge window [mem 0x6200000000000-0x6203fbff0ffff 64bit pref]: was not released (still contains assigned resources)
> pci 0030:00:00.0: Assigned bridge window [mem 0x6200000000000-0x6203fbff0ffff 64bit pref] to [bus 01-04] free space at [mem 0x6200400000000-0x62007ffffffff 64bit pref]
> pci 0030:00:00.0: Assigned bridge window [mem 0x6200000000000-0x6203fbff0ffff 64bit pref] to [bus 01-04] cannot fit 0x4000000000 required for 0030:01:00.0 bridging to [bus 02-04]
> 
> The old size of 0x6200000000000-0x6203fbff0ffff resource was used as
> the lower bound which results in 0x4000000000 size request due to
> alignment. That exceed what can fit into the parent window.
> 
> Since the lower bound never even was enforced fully because the
> resource addresses were cleared when the bridge window is released,
> remove the old_size lower bound entirely and trust the calculated
> bridge window size is enough.
> 
> This same problem may occur on io window side but seems less likely to
> cause issues due to general difference in alignment. Removing the lower
> bound may have other unforeseen consequences in case of io window so
> it's better to do leave as -next material if no problem is reported
> related to io window sizing (BAR resize shouldn't touch io windows
> anyway).
> 
> Reported-by: Simon Richter <Simon.Richter@...yros.de>

I guess this report was
https://lore.kernel.org/r/f9a8c975-f5d3-4dd2-988e-4371a1433a60@hogyros.de/,
right?

> Fixes: 3baeae36039a ("PCI: Use pci_release_resource() instead of release_resource()")
> Signed-off-by: Ilpo Järvinen <ilpo.jarvinen@...ux.intel.com>
> ---
>  drivers/pci/setup-bus.c | 11 +++--------
>  1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/pci/setup-bus.c b/drivers/pci/setup-bus.c
> index 612288716ba8..8660449f59bd 100644
> --- a/drivers/pci/setup-bus.c
> +++ b/drivers/pci/setup-bus.c
> @@ -1071,16 +1071,13 @@ static resource_size_t calculate_memsize(resource_size_t size,
>  					 resource_size_t min_size,
>  					 resource_size_t add_size,
>  					 resource_size_t children_add_size,
> -					 resource_size_t old_size,
>  					 resource_size_t align)
>  {
>  	if (size < min_size)
>  		size = min_size;
> -	if (old_size == 1)
> -		old_size = 0;
>  
>  	size = max(size, add_size) + children_add_size;
> -	return ALIGN(max(size, old_size), align);
> +	return ALIGN(size, align);
>  }
>  
>  resource_size_t __weak pcibios_window_alignment(struct pci_bus *bus,
> @@ -1298,7 +1295,6 @@ static void pbus_size_mem(struct pci_bus *bus, unsigned long type,
>  	resource_size_t children_add_size = 0;
>  	resource_size_t children_add_align = 0;
>  	resource_size_t add_align = 0;
> -	resource_size_t old_size;
>  
>  	if (!b_res)
>  		return;
> @@ -1364,11 +1360,10 @@ static void pbus_size_mem(struct pci_bus *bus, unsigned long type,
>  		}
>  	}
>  
> -	old_size = resource_size(b_res);
>  	win_align = window_alignment(bus, b_res->flags);
>  	min_align = calculate_head_align(aligns, max_order);
>  	min_align = max(min_align, win_align);
> -	size0 = calculate_memsize(size, min_size, 0, 0, old_size, win_align);
> +	size0 = calculate_memsize(size, min_size, 0, 0, win_align);
>  
>  	if (size0) {
>  		resource_set_range(b_res, min_align, size0);
> @@ -1378,7 +1373,7 @@ static void pbus_size_mem(struct pci_bus *bus, unsigned long type,
>  	if (realloc_head && (add_size > 0 || children_add_size > 0)) {
>  		add_align = max(min_align, add_align);
>  		size1 = calculate_memsize(size, min_size, add_size, children_add_size,
> -					  old_size, win_align);
> +					  win_align);
>  	}
>  
>  	if (!size0 && !size1) {
> -- 
> 2.39.5
>