netdev - Re: [PATCH 6/7] PCI: Make sure VF's driver get attached after PF's

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: <519BE778.9040800@redhat.com>
Date:	Tue, 21 May 2013 17:30:32 -0400
From:	Don Dutile <ddutile@...hat.com>
To:	Alexander Duyck <alexander.h.duyck@...el.com>
CC:	Yinghai Lu <yinghai@...nel.org>,
	Bjorn Helgaas <bhelgaas@...gle.com>,
	Gu Zheng <guz.fnst@...fujitsu.com>,
	"linux-pci@...r.kernel.org" <linux-pci@...r.kernel.org>,
	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	NetDev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
	"Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 6/7] PCI: Make sure VF's driver get attached after PF's

On 05/14/2013 05:39 PM, Alexander Duyck wrote:
> On 05/14/2013 12:59 PM, Yinghai Lu wrote:
>> On Tue, May 14, 2013 at 12:45 PM, Alexander Duyck
>> <alexander.h.duyck@...el.com>  wrote:
>>> On 05/14/2013 11:44 AM, Yinghai Lu wrote:
>>>> On Tue, May 14, 2013 at 9:00 AM, Alexander Duyck
>>>> <alexander.h.duyck@...el.com>  wrote:
>>>>> I'm sorry, but what is the point of this patch?  With device assignment
>>>>> it is always possible to have VFs loaded and the PF driver unloaded
>>>>> since you cannot remove the VFs if they are assigned to a VM.
>>>> unload PF driver will not call pci_disable_sriov?
>>> You cannot call pci_disable_sriov because you will panic all of the
>>> guests that have devices assigned.
>> ixgbe_remove did call pci_disable_sriov...
>>
>> for guest panic, that is another problem.
>> just like you pci passthrough with real pci device and hotremove the
>> card in host.
>>
>> ...
>
> I suggest you take another look.  In ixgbe_disable_sriov, which is the
> function that is called we do a check for assigned VFs.  If they are
> assigned then we do not call pci_disable_sriov.
>
>>
>>> So how does your patch actually fix this problem?  It seems like it is
>>> just avoiding it.
>> yes, until the first one is done.
>
> Avoiding the issue doesn't fix the underlying problem and instead you
> are likely just introducing more bugs as a result.
>
>>>  From what I can tell your problem is originating in pci_call_probe.  I
>>> believe it is calling work_on_cpu and that doesn't seem correct since
>>> the work should be taking place on a CPU already local to the PF. You
>>> might want to look there to see why you are trying to schedule work on a
>>> CPU which should be perfectly fine for you to already be doing your work on.
>> it always try to go with local cpu with same pxm.
>
> The problem is we really shouldn't be calling work_for_cpu in this case
> since we are already on the correct CPU.  What probably should be
> happening is that pci_call_probe should be doing a check to see if the
> current CPU is already contained within the device node map and if so
> just call local_pci_probe directly.  That way you can avoid deadlocking
> the system by trying to flush the CPU queue of the CPU you are currently on.
>
That's the patch that Michael Tsirkin posted for a fix,
but it was noted that if you have the case where the _same_ driver is used for vf & pf,
other deadlocks may occur.
It would work in the case of ixgbe/ixgbevf, but not for something like
the Mellanox pf/vf driver (which is the same).

>
> Alex
> --
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-pci" in
> the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
> More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

--
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