netdev - Re: [PATCH] e1000e: Relax condition to trigger reset for ME workaround

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Fri, 22 May 2020 12:20:57 +0900
From:   Punit Agrawal <punit1.agrawal@...hiba.co.jp>
To:     "Brown\, Aaron F" <aaron.f.brown@...el.com>
Cc:     "Kirsher\, Jeffrey T" <jeffrey.t.kirsher@...el.com>,
        "daniel.sangorrin\@toshiba.co.jp" <daniel.sangorrin@...hiba.co.jp>,
        Alexander Duyck <alexander.h.duyck@...ux.intel.com>,
        "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
        "intel-wired-lan\@lists.osuosl.org" 
        <intel-wired-lan@...ts.osuosl.org>,
        "netdev\@vger.kernel.org" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
        "linux-kernel\@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] e1000e: Relax condition to trigger reset for ME workaround

Hi Aaron,

"Brown, Aaron F" <aaron.f.brown@...el.com> writes:

>> From: netdev-owner@...r.kernel.org <netdev-owner@...r.kernel.org> On
>> Behalf Of Punit Agrawal
>> Sent: Thursday, May 14, 2020 9:31 PM
>> To: Kirsher, Jeffrey T <jeffrey.t.kirsher@...el.com>
>> Cc: daniel.sangorrin@...hiba.co.jp; Punit Agrawal
>> <punit1.agrawal@...hiba.co.jp>; Alexander Duyck
>> <alexander.h.duyck@...ux.intel.com>; David S. Miller <davem@...emloft.net>;
>> intel-wired-lan@...ts.osuosl.org; netdev@...r.kernel.org; linux-
>> kernel@...r.kernel.org
>> Subject: [PATCH] e1000e: Relax condition to trigger reset for ME workaround
>> 
>> It's an error if the value of the RX/TX tail descriptor does not match
>> what was written. The error condition is true regardless the duration
>> of the interference from ME. But the driver only performs the reset if
>> E1000_ICH_FWSM_PCIM2PCI_COUNT (2000) iterations of 50us delay have
>> transpired. The extra condition can lead to inconsistency between the
>> state of hardware as expected by the driver.
>> 
>> Fix this by dropping the check for number of delay iterations.
>> 
>> While at it, also make __ew32_prepare() static as it's not used
>> anywhere else.
>> 
>> Signed-off-by: Punit Agrawal <punit1.agrawal@...hiba.co.jp>
>> Reviewed-by: Alexander Duyck <alexander.h.duyck@...ux.intel.com>
>> Cc: Jeff Kirsher <jeffrey.t.kirsher@...el.com>
>> Cc: "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>
>> Cc: intel-wired-lan@...ts.osuosl.org
>> Cc: netdev@...r.kernel.org
>> Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
>> ---
>> Hi Jeff,
>> 
>> If there are no further comments please consider merging the patch.
>> 
>> Also, should it be marked for backport to stable?
>> 
>> Thanks,
>> Punit
>> 
>> RFC[0] -> v1:
>> * Dropped return value for __ew32_prepare() as it's not used
>> * Made __ew32_prepare() static
>> * Added tags
>> 
>> [0] https://lkml.org/lkml/2020/5/12/20
>> 
>>  drivers/net/ethernet/intel/e1000e/e1000.h  |  1 -
>>  drivers/net/ethernet/intel/e1000e/netdev.c | 12 +++++-------
>>  2 files changed, 5 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)
>> 
> Tested-by: Aaron Brown <aaron.f.brown@...el.com>

Thanks for taking the patch for a spin.

Jeff, let me know if you're okay to apply the tag or want me to send a
new version.

Thanks,
Punit