[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <F9877D83-226B-4C7A-AD01-E9AA441AD1CD@qlogic.com>
Date: Thu, 12 May 2011 11:53:37 -0700
From: Anirban Chakraborty <anirban.chakraborty@...gic.com>
To: Ben Hutchings <bhutchings@...arflare.com>
CC: netdev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>, David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
Subject: Re: [PATCHv3 net-next-2.6 2/3] qlcnic: Take FW dump via ethtool
On May 12, 2011, at 10:27 AM, Ben Hutchings wrote:
> On Wed, 2011-05-11 at 15:54 -0700, Anirban Chakraborty wrote:
>> Driver checks if the previous dump has been cleared before taking the dump.
>> It doesn't take the dump if it is not cleared.
>>
>> Changes from v2:
>> Added lock to protect dump data structures from being mangled while
>> dumping or setting them via ethtool.
>
> Unfortunately it still seems to be possible for the dump length to
> change between the ethtool core calling qlcnic_get_dump_flag() and
> qlcnic_get_dump_data().
dump length is serialized via the driver lock. dump length is a static entity for a given capture mask
and it can only be changed when there is a different capture mask set in the driver (via calling
set_dump() from ethtool core).
Actual dump size is determined during the initial steps of FW dump which takes the driver lock
to start with. So, I am not sure how the dump length could be changed between the calls to
get_dump_flag and get_dump_data from within the ethtool core without a call to set_dump()
in between.
>
> So I think qlcnic_get_dump_data() will need to double-check the length
> after taking the internal lock:
>
> [...]
>> +static int
>> +qlcnic_get_dump_data(struct net_device *netdev, struct ethtool_dump *dump,
>> + void *buffer)
>> +{
>> + int i, copy_sz;
>> + u32 *hdr_ptr, *data;
>> + struct qlcnic_adapter *adapter = netdev_priv(netdev);
>> + struct qlcnic_fw_dump *fw_dump = &adapter->ahw->fw_dump;
>> +
>> + if (qlcnic_api_lock(adapter))
>> + return -EIO;
> [...]
>
> if (dump->len < fw_dump->tmpl_hdr->size + fw_dump->size) {
> qlcnic_api_unlock(adapter);
> return -EINVAL;
> }
>
> I'm not sure about the error code... and I'm really not happy about the
> need to check lengths in both the ethtool core and the driver.
I can put the check in here but don't think it is required really.
>
> Can't you change the function that actually makes a dump to acquire the
> RTNL lock? (You'll need to do that *before* acquiring the driver's own
> lock.)
We can't do that because the driver lock is taken at much higher level where it does
some hardware specific things even before attempting to take FW dump.
Thanks.
-Anirban
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Powered by blists - more mailing lists