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 PHC | |
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
| ||
|
Date: Fri, 19 Apr 2019 07:29:02 -0400 From: Neil Horman <nhorman@...hat.com> To: Huazhong Tan <tanhuazhong@...wei.com> Cc: davem@...emloft.net, netdev@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, salil.mehta@...wei.com, yisen.zhuang@...wei.com, linuxarm@...wei.com, Weihang Li <liweihang@...ilicon.com>, Peng Li <lipeng321@...wei.com> Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next 10/12] net: hns3: Add handling of MAC tunnel interruption On Fri, Apr 19, 2019 at 11:05:45AM +0800, Huazhong Tan wrote: > From: Weihang Li <liweihang@...ilicon.com> > > MAC tnl interruptions are different from other type of RAS and MSI-X > errors, because some bits, such as OVF/LR/RF will occur during link up > and down. > > The drivers should clear status of all MAC tnl interruption bits but > shouldn't print any message that would mislead the users. > > In case that link down and re-up in a short time because of some reasons, > we record when they occurred, and users can query them by debugfs. > > Signed-off-by: Weihang Li <liweihang@...ilicon.com> > Signed-off-by: Peng Li <lipeng321@...wei.com> > --- ><snip>> > bool en) > { > @@ -1611,6 +1636,7 @@ pci_ers_result_t hclge_handle_hw_ras_error(struct hnae3_ae_dev *ae_dev) > int hclge_handle_hw_msix_error(struct hclge_dev *hdev, > unsigned long *reset_requests) > { > + struct hclge_mac_tnl_stats mac_tnl_stats; > struct device *dev = &hdev->pdev->dev; > u32 mpf_bd_num, pf_bd_num, bd_num; > enum hnae3_reset_type reset_level; > @@ -1745,6 +1771,31 @@ int hclge_handle_hw_msix_error(struct hclge_dev *hdev, > set_bit(HNAE3_GLOBAL_RESET, reset_requests); > } > > + /* query and clear mac tnl interruptions */ > + hclge_cmd_setup_basic_desc(&desc[0], HCLGE_OPC_QUERY_MAC_TNL_INT, > + true); > + ret = hclge_cmd_send(&hdev->hw, &desc[0], 1); Is this running in interrupt context ever? I don't think it is, but the function name makes me think otherwise. If it is, this could be unsafe as you take a spinlock in hclge_cmd_send, which is protected against bottom halves, but not interrupts. That could cause a deadlock if there is a path to get here directly from an interrupt context. Neil
Powered by blists - more mailing lists