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
| ||
|
Message-ID: <20230821110146.GA6583@unreal> Date: Mon, 21 Aug 2023 14:01:46 +0300 From: Leon Romanovsky <leon@...nel.org> To: Przemek Kitszel <przemyslaw.kitszel@...el.com> Cc: Tony Nguyen <anthony.l.nguyen@...el.com>, Jesse Brandeburg <jesse.brandeburg@...el.com>, intel-wired-lan@...ts.osuosl.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org, Mateusz Polchlopek <mateusz.polchlopek@...el.com>, Jacob Keller <jacob.e.keller@...el.com> Subject: Re: [PATCH iwl-next] ice: store VF's pci_dev ptr in ice_vf On Mon, Aug 21, 2023 at 12:48:40PM +0200, Przemek Kitszel wrote: > On 8/18/23 20:20, Leon Romanovsky wrote: > > On Fri, Aug 18, 2023 at 02:20:51PM +0200, Przemek Kitszel wrote: > > > On 8/16/23 16:31, Leon Romanovsky wrote: > > > > On Wed, Aug 16, 2023 at 04:54:54AM -0400, Przemek Kitszel wrote: > > > > > Extend struct ice_vf by vfdev. > > > > > Calculation of vfdev falls more nicely into ice_create_vf_entries(). > > > > > > > > > > Caching of vfdev enables simplification of ice_restore_all_vfs_msi_state(). > > > > > > > > I see that old code had access to pci_dev * of VF without any locking > > > > from concurrent PCI core access. How is it protected? How do you make > > > > sure that vfdev is valid? > > > > > > > > Generally speaking, it is rarely good idea to cache VF pci_dev pointers > > > > inside driver. > > > > > > > > Thanks > > > > > > Overall, I do agree that ice driver, as a whole, has room for improvement in > > > terms of synchronization, objects lifetime, and similar. > > > > > > In this particular case, I don't see any reason of PCI reconfiguration > > > during VF lifetime, but likely I'm missing something? > > > > You are caching VF pointer in PF, > > that's correct that the driver is PF/ice > > > and you are subjected to PF lifetime > > and not VF lifetime. > > this belongs to struct ice_vf, which should have VF lifetime, > otherwise it's already at risk I'm not so sure about it. ICE used to use devm_* API and not explicit kalloc/kfree calls, it is not clear anymore the lifetime scope of VF structure. Thanks > > > > > Thanks > > Thank you!
Powered by blists - more mailing lists