PCI VPD access fixes
Subsystems (3)
v2 cover PCI VPD access fixes
Hi all,
the current PCI VPD page access assumes that the entire possible VPD data is readable. However, the spec only guarantees a VPD data up to the 'end' marker, with everything beyond that being undefined. This causes a system lockup on certain devices.
With this patch we always set the VPD sysfs attribute size to '0', and calculate the available VPD size on the first access.
If no valid data can be read an I/O error is returned.
I've also included the patch from Babu to blacklists devices which are known to lockup when accessing the VPD data.
Babu Moger (1):
pci: Blacklist vpd access for buggy devices
Hannes Reinecke (3):
pci: Update VPD definitions
pci: allow access to VPD attributes with size '0'
pci: Determine actual VPD size on first access
drivers/pci/access.c | 79 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- drivers/pci/pci-sysfs.c | 22 ++++++++------ drivers/pci/quirks.c | 41 +++++++++++++++++++++++++ include/linux/pci.h | 27 +++++++++++++++-- 4 files changed, 157 insertions(+), 12 deletions(-)
Signature · 1 line
1.8.5.6
PATCH v2 1/4 pci: Update VPD definitions
The 'end' tag is actually 0x0f, it's the representation as a small resource data type tag that's 0x78 (ie shifted by 3). This patch also adds helper functions to extract the resource data type tags for both large and small resource data types.
--- include/linux/pci.h | 27 +++++++++++++++++++++++++-- 1 file changed, 25 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
include/linux/pci.h +25 -2
@@ -1836,12 +1836,13 @@ bool pci_acs_path_enabled(struct pci_dev *start,#define PCI_VPD_LRDT_RW_DATA PCI_VPD_LRDT_ID(PCI_VPD_LTIN_RW_DATA)/* Small Resource Data Type Tag Item Names */ -#define PCI_VPD_STIN_END 0x78/* End */ +#define PCI_VPD_STIN_END 0x0f/* End */ -#define PCI_VPD_SRDT_END PCI_VPD_STIN_END +#define PCI_VPD_SRDT_END (PCI_VPD_STIN_END << 3)#define PCI_VPD_SRDT_TIN_MASK 0x78#define PCI_VPD_SRDT_LEN_MASK 0x07 +#define PCI_VPD_LRDT_TIN_MASK 0x7f#define PCI_VPD_LRDT_TAG_SIZE 3#define PCI_VPD_SRDT_TAG_SIZE 1
@@ -1865,6 +1866,17 @@ static inline u16 pci_vpd_lrdt_size(const u8 *lrdt) }/** +* pci_vpd_lrdt_tag - Extracts the Large Resource Data Type Tag Item +* @lrdt: Pointer to the beginning of the Large Resource Data Type tag +* +* Returns the extracted Large Resource Data Type Tag item. +*/ +static inline u16 pci_vpd_lrdt_tag (const u8 *lrdt) +{ +return (u16)(lrdt[0 ] &PCI_VPD_LRDT_TIN_MASK ); +} + +/** * pci_vpd_srdt_size - Extracts the Small Resource Data Type length * @lrdt: Pointer to the beginning of the Small Resource Data Type tag *
@@ -1876,6 +1888,17 @@ static inline u8 pci_vpd_srdt_size(const u8 *srdt) }/** +* pci_vpd_srdt_tag - Extracts the Small Resource Data Type Tag Item +* @lrdt: Pointer to the beginning of the Small Resource Data Type tag +* +* Returns the extracted Small Resource Data Type Tag Item. +*/ +static inline u8 pci_vpd_srdt_tag (const u8 *srdt) +{ +return ((*srdt) &PCI_VPD_SRDT_TIN_MASK ) >>3 ; +} + +/** * pci_vpd_info_field_size - Extracts the information field length * @lrdt: Pointer to the beginning of an information field header *
Signature · 1 line
1.8.5.6
PATCH v2 2/4 pci: allow access to VPD attributes with size '0'
In reply to Hannes ReineckeIt is not always possible to determine the actual size of the VPD data, so allow access to them if the size is set to '0'.
--- drivers/pci/pci-sysfs.c | 20 ++++++++++++-------- 1 file changed, 12 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)
drivers/pci/pci-sysfs.c +12 -8
@@ -772,10 +772,12 @@ static ssize_t read_vpd_attr(struct file *filp, struct kobject *kobj,struct pci_dev *dev = to_pci_dev(container_of(kobj, struct device, kobj)); -if (off > bin_attr->size) - count =0 ; -else if (count > bin_attr->size - off) - count = bin_attr->size - off; +if (bin_attr->size >0 ) { +if (off > bin_attr->size) + count =0 ; +else if (count > bin_attr->size - off) + count = bin_attr->size - off; + }return pci_read_vpd (dev, off, count, buf); }
@@ -787,10 +789,12 @@ static ssize_t write_vpd_attr(struct file *filp, struct kobject *kobj,struct pci_dev *dev = to_pci_dev(container_of(kobj, struct device, kobj)); -if (off > bin_attr->size) - count =0 ; -else if (count > bin_attr->size - off) - count = bin_attr->size - off; +if (bin_attr->size >0 ) { +if (off > bin_attr->size) + count =0 ; +else if (count > bin_attr->size - off) + count = bin_attr->size - off; + }return pci_write_vpd (dev, off, count, buf); }
Signature · 1 line
1.8.5.6
Re: [PATCHv2 2/4] pci: allow access to VPD attributes with size '0'
Hi Hannes,
Quoted 16 lines · Hannes Reinecke
It is not always possible to determine the actual size of the VPD data, so allow access to them if the size is set to '0'.
Signed-off-by Hannes Reinecke <[email protected]>--- drivers/pci/pci-sysfs.c | 20 ++++++++++++-------- 1 file changed, 12 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)drivers/pci/pci-sysfs.c +0
-0@@ -772,10 +772,12 @@ static ssize_t read_vpd_attr(struct file *filp, struct kobject *kobj,struct pci_dev *dev = to_pci_dev(container_of(kobj, struct device, kobj));
drivers/pci/pci-sysfs.c static ssize_t read_vpd_attr(struct file *filp, struct kobject *kobj, · line 780
Quoted 10 lines
drivers/pci/pci-sysfs.c +6
-4-if (off > bin_attr->size) - count =0 ; -else if (count > bin_attr->size - off) - count = bin_attr->size - off; +if (bin_attr->size >0 ) { +if (off > bin_attr->size) + count =0 ; +else if (count > bin_attr->size - off) + count = bin_attr->size - off; + }
I'm trying to figure out why we do any of this checking here. It seems like we could do all of it in pci_read_vpd().
Where is bin_attr->size set? I assume this is the "attr" allocated in pci_create_capabilities_sysfs(). I see that before your series, we set "attr->size = dev->vpd->len" there, but after patch 3/4 of your series, we set it to 0 there, and I don't see a place that sets it to anything else.
Quoted 26 lines
drivers/pci/pci-sysfs.c +6
-4return pci_read_vpd (dev, off, count, buf); }@@ -787,10 +789,12 @@ static ssize_t write_vpd_attr(struct file *filp, struct kobject *kobj,struct pci_dev *dev = to_pci_dev(container_of(kobj, struct device, kobj)); -if (off > bin_attr->size) - count =0 ; -else if (count > bin_attr->size - off) - count = bin_attr->size - off; +if (bin_attr->size >0 ) { +if (off > bin_attr->size) + count =0 ; +else if (count > bin_attr->size - off) + count = bin_attr->size - off; + }return pci_write_vpd (dev, off, count, buf); }Signature · 6 lines
1.8.5.6 -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-pci" in the body of a message to [email protected] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Re: [PATCHv2 2/4] pci: allow access to VPD attributes with size '0'
Quoted 33 lines · Bjorn Helgaas
Hi Hannes,
Quoted 16 lines · Hannes Reinecke
It is not always possible to determine the actual size of the VPD data, so allow access to them if the size is set to '0'.
Signed-off-by Hannes Reinecke <[email protected]>--- drivers/pci/pci-sysfs.c | 20 ++++++++++++-------- 1 file changed, 12 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)drivers/pci/pci-sysfs.c +0
-0@@ -772,10 +772,12 @@ static ssize_t read_vpd_attr(struct file *filp, struct kobject *kobj,struct pci_dev *dev = to_pci_dev(container_of(kobj, struct device, kobj));drivers/pci/pci-sysfs.c static ssize_t read_vpd_attr(struct file *filp, struct kobject *kobj, · line 780
Quoted 10 lines
drivers/pci/pci-sysfs.c +6
-4-if (off > bin_attr->size) - count =0 ; -else if (count > bin_attr->size - off) - count = bin_attr->size - off; +if (bin_attr->size >0 ) { +if (off > bin_attr->size) + count =0 ; +else if (count > bin_attr->size - off) + count = bin_attr->size - off; + }I'm trying to figure out why we do any of this checking here. It seems like we could do all of it in
pci_read_vpd().
Quoted 6 lines
Where is
bin_attr->sizeset? I assume this is the "attr" allocated inpci_create_capabilities_sysfs(). I see that before your series, we set "attr->size=dev->vpd->len" there, but after patch 3/4 of your series, we set it to 0 there, and I don't see a place that sets it to anything else.
That is entirely correct.
One of the joys of sysfs binary attributes.
In general, sysfs binary attributes are allowed to have a size of '0', but still can provide data when read.
The size of '0' is just an indicator for "I don't know how much data I can provide, figure out yourself".
(Cf fs/sysfs/file.c:sysfs_kf_bin_read() for details here)
In our case we're not using that function, but rather our own pci_read_vpd(), which always exposes a size.
So this patch just takes the same reasoning from sysfs_kf_bin_read(), and sets the size to '0', as initially we simply do _not_ know how much data will be provided.
Cheers,
Hannes
Signature · 5 lines
Dr. Hannes Reinecke Teamlead Storage & Networking [email protected] +49 911 74053 688 SUSE LINUX GmbH, Maxfeldstr. 5, 90409 Nürnberg GF: F. Imendörffer, J. Smithard, J. Guild, D. Upmanyu, G. Norton HRB 21284 (AG Nürnberg)
PATCH v2 3/4 pci: Determine actual VPD size on first access
In reply to Hannes ReineckePCI-2.2 VPD entries have a maximum size of 32k, but might actually be smaller than that. To figure out the actual size one has to read the VPD area until the 'end marker' is reached.
Trying to read VPD data beyond that marker results in 'interesting' effects, from simple read errors to crashing the card. And to make matters worse not every PCI card implements this properly, leaving us with no 'end' marker or even completely invalid data. This path tries to determine the size of the VPD data. If no valid data can be read an I/O error will be returned when reading the sysfs attribute.
--- drivers/pci/access.c | 76 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- drivers/pci/pci-sysfs.c | 2 +- 2 files changed, 76 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
drivers/pci/access.c +75 -1
@@ -284,9 +284,65 @@ struct pci_vpd_pci22 {struct mutex lock;u16 flag;bool busy; +bool valid;u8 cap; }; +/** +* pci_vpd_size - determine actual size of Vital Product Data +* @dev: pci device struct +* @old_size: current assumed size, also maximum allowed size +* +*/ +static size_t +pci_vpd_pci22_size (struct pci_dev *dev) +{ +size_t off =0 ; +unsigned char header[1 +2 ];/* 1 byte tag, 2 bytes length */ + +while (off <PCI_VPD_PCI22_SIZE && +pci_read_vpd (dev, off,1 , header) ==1 ) { +unsigned char tag; + +if (header[0 ] &PCI_VPD_LRDT ) { +/* Large Resource Data Type Tag */ + tag =pci_vpd_lrdt_tag (header); +/* Only read length from known tag items */ +if ((tag ==PCI_VPD_LTIN_ID_STRING ) || + (tag ==PCI_VPD_LTIN_RO_DATA ) || + (tag ==PCI_VPD_LTIN_RW_DATA )) { +if (pci_read_vpd (dev, off+1 ,2 , + &header[1 ]) !=2 ) { +dev_dbg (&dev->dev, +"invalid large vpd tag %02x " +"size at offset %zu" , + tag, off +1 ); +break ; + } + off +=PCI_VPD_LRDT_TAG_SIZE + +pci_vpd_lrdt_size (header); + } + }else { +/* Short Resource Data Type Tag */ + off +=PCI_VPD_SRDT_TAG_SIZE + +pci_vpd_srdt_size (header); + tag =pci_vpd_srdt_tag (header); + } +if (tag ==PCI_VPD_STIN_END )/* End tag descriptor */ +return off; +if ((tag !=PCI_VPD_LTIN_ID_STRING ) && + (tag !=PCI_VPD_LTIN_RO_DATA ) && + (tag !=PCI_VPD_LTIN_RW_DATA )) { +dev_dbg (&dev->dev, +"invalid %s vpd tag %02x at offset %zu" , + (header[0 ] &PCI_VPD_LRDT ) ?"large" :"short" , + tag, off); +break ; + } + } +return 0 ; +} +/* * Wait for last operation to complete. * This code has to spin since there is no other notification from the PCI
@@ -337,9 +393,23 @@ static ssize_t pci_vpd_pci22_read(struct pci_dev *dev, loff_t pos, size_t count,loff_t end = pos + count;u8 *buf = arg; -if (pos <0 || pos > vpd->base.len || end > vpd->base.len) +if (pos <0 )return -EINVAL ; +if (!vpd->valid) { + vpd->valid = true; + vpd->base.len =pci_vpd_pci22_size (dev); + } +if (vpd->base.len ==0 ) +return -EIO ; + +if (end > vpd->base.len) { +if (pos > vpd->base.len) +return 0 ; + end = vpd->base.len; + count = end - pos; + } +if (mutex_lock_killable (&vpd->lock))return -EINTR ;
@@ -389,6 +459,9 @@ static ssize_t pci_vpd_pci22_write(struct pci_dev *dev, loff_t pos, size_t countloff_t end = pos + count;int ret =0 ; +if (!vpd->valid) +return -EAGAIN ; +if (pos <0 || (pos &3 ) || (count &3 ) || end > vpd->base.len)return -EINVAL ;
@@ -496,6 +569,7 @@ int pci_vpd_pci22_init(struct pci_dev *dev)mutex_init (&vpd->lock); vpd->cap = cap; vpd->busy = false; + vpd->valid = false; dev->vpd = &vpd->base;return 0 ; }
drivers/pci/pci-sysfs.c +1 -1
@@ -1333,7 +1333,7 @@ static int pci_create_capabilities_sysfs(struct pci_dev *dev)return -ENOMEM ;sysfs_bin_attr_init (attr); - attr->size = dev->vpd->len; + attr->size =0 ; attr->attr.name ="vpd" ; attr->attr.mode =S_IRUSR |S_IWUSR ; attr->read = read_vpd_attr;
Signature · 1 line
1.8.5.6
Re: [PATCHv2 3/4] pci: Determine actual VPD size on first access
Quoted 24 lines · Hannes Reinecke
PCI-2.2 VPD entries have a maximum size of 32k, but might actually be smaller than that. To figure out the actual size one has to read the VPD area until the 'end marker' is reached.
Trying to read VPD data beyond that marker results in 'interesting' effects, from simple read errors to crashing the card. And to make matters worse not every PCI card implements this properly, leaving us with no 'end' marker or even completely invalid data. This path tries to determine the size of the VPD data. If no valid data can be read an I/O error will be returned when reading the sysfs attribute.Cc Alexander Duyck <[email protected]>Cc Bjorn Helgaas <[email protected]>Signed-off-by Hannes Reinecke <[email protected]>--- drivers/pci/access.c | 76 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- drivers/pci/pci-sysfs.c | 2 +- 2 files changed, 76 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)drivers/pci/access.c +0
-0
drivers/pci/access.c struct pci_vpd_pci22 { · line 287
Quoted 4 lines
drivers/pci/access.c +1
-0@@ -284,9 +284,65 @@ struct pci_vpd_pci22 {struct mutex lock;u16 flag;bool busy; +bool valid;
You're just following the precedent here, but I think using "bool" in structures like this is pointless: it takes more space than a :1 field and doesn't really add any safety.
drivers/pci/access.c struct pci_vpd_pci22 { · line 295
Quoted 8 lines
drivers/pci/access.c +5
-0u8 cap; }; +/** +* pci_vpd_size - determine actual size of Vital Product Data +* @dev: pci device struct +* @old_size: current assumed size, also maximum allowed size +*
Superfluous empty line.
drivers/pci/access.c struct pci_vpd_pci22 { · line 298
Quoted 3 lines
drivers/pci/access.c +3
-0+*/ +static size_t +pci_vpd_pci22_size (struct pci_dev *dev)
Please follow indentation style of the file (all on one line).
Quoted 11 lines
drivers/pci/access.c +11
-0+{ +size_t off =0 ; +unsigned char header[1 +2 ];/* 1 byte tag, 2 bytes length */ + +while (off <PCI_VPD_PCI22_SIZE && +pci_read_vpd (dev, off,1 , header) ==1 ) { +unsigned char tag; + +if (header[0 ] &PCI_VPD_LRDT ) { +/* Large Resource Data Type Tag */ + tag =pci_vpd_lrdt_tag (header);
drivers/pci/access.c struct pci_vpd_pci22 { · line 319
Quoted 10 lines
drivers/pci/access.c +10
-0+/* Only read length from known tag items */ +if ((tag ==PCI_VPD_LTIN_ID_STRING ) || + (tag ==PCI_VPD_LTIN_RO_DATA ) || + (tag ==PCI_VPD_LTIN_RW_DATA )) { +if (pci_read_vpd (dev, off+1 ,2 , + &header[1 ]) !=2 ) { +dev_dbg (&dev->dev, +"invalid large vpd tag %02x " +"size at offset %zu" , + tag, off +1 );
The effect of this is that we set vpd->base.len to 0, which will cause all VPD accesses to fail, right? If so, I'd make this at least a dev_info(), maybe even a dev_warn(). The dev_dbg() may not appear in dmesg at all, depending on config options.
Capitalize "VPD" and concatenate all the strings, even if it exceeds 80 columns.
drivers/pci/access.c struct pci_vpd_pci22 { · line 320
Quoted 1 line
drivers/pci/access.c +1
-0+break ;
I think this leads to "return 0" below; I'd just return directly here so the reader doesn't have to figure out what we're breaking from.
Quoted 10 lines
drivers/pci/access.c +10
-0+ } + off +=PCI_VPD_LRDT_TAG_SIZE + +pci_vpd_lrdt_size (header); + } + }else { +/* Short Resource Data Type Tag */ + off +=PCI_VPD_SRDT_TAG_SIZE + +pci_vpd_srdt_size (header); + tag =pci_vpd_srdt_tag (header); + }
drivers/pci/access.c struct pci_vpd_pci22 { · line 340
Quoted 10 lines
drivers/pci/access.c +10
-0+if (tag ==PCI_VPD_STIN_END )/* End tag descriptor */ +return off; +if ((tag !=PCI_VPD_LTIN_ID_STRING ) && + (tag !=PCI_VPD_LTIN_RO_DATA ) && + (tag !=PCI_VPD_LTIN_RW_DATA )) { +dev_dbg (&dev->dev, +"invalid %s vpd tag %02x at offset %zu" , + (header[0 ] &PCI_VPD_LRDT ) ?"large" :"short" , + tag, off); +break ;
Same dev_dbg() and break comment here.
Quoted 34 lines
drivers/pci/access.c +20
-1+ } + } +return 0 ; +} +/* * Wait for last operation to complete. * This code has to spin since there is no other notification from the PCI @@ -337,9 +393,23 @@ static ssize_t pci_vpd_pci22_read(struct pci_dev *dev, loff_t pos, size_t count,loff_t end = pos + count;u8 *buf = arg; -if (pos <0 || pos > vpd->base.len || end > vpd->base.len) +if (pos <0 )return -EINVAL ; +if (!vpd->valid) { + vpd->valid = true; + vpd->base.len =pci_vpd_pci22_size (dev); + } +if (vpd->base.len ==0 ) +return -EIO ; + +if (end > vpd->base.len) { +if (pos > vpd->base.len) +return 0 ; + end = vpd->base.len; + count = end - pos; + } +if (mutex_lock_killable (&vpd->lock))return -EINTR ;
drivers/pci/access.c static ssize_t pci_vpd_pci22_write(struct pci_dev *dev, loff_t pos, size_t count · line 463
Quoted 5 lines
drivers/pci/access.c +2
-0@@ -389,6 +459,9 @@ static ssize_t pci_vpd_pci22_write(struct pci_dev *dev, loff_t pos, size_t countloff_t end = pos + count;int ret =0 ; +if (!vpd->valid) +return -EAGAIN ;
Does this mean we now have to do a VPD read before a VPD write? That sounds like a new requirement that is non-obvious.
Quoted 17 lines
drivers/pci/access.c +2
-0+if (pos <0 || (pos &3 ) || (count &3 ) || end > vpd->base.len)return -EINVAL ;@@ -496,6 +569,7 @@ int pci_vpd_pci22_init(struct pci_dev *dev)mutex_init (&vpd->lock); vpd->cap = cap; vpd->busy = false; + vpd->valid = false; dev->vpd = &vpd->base;return 0 ; }drivers/pci/pci-sysfs.c +0
-0
drivers/pci/pci-sysfs.c static int pci_create_capabilities_sysfs(struct pci_dev *dev) · line 1336
Quoted 5 lines
drivers/pci/pci-sysfs.c +1
-1@@ -1333,7 +1333,7 @@ static int pci_create_capabilities_sysfs(struct pci_dev *dev)return -ENOMEM ;sysfs_bin_attr_init (attr); - attr->size = dev->vpd->len; + attr->size =0 ;
I'm still puzzled about how we're using attr->size. I don't really want that size to change at run-time, i.e., I don't want it to be zero immediately after boot, then change to something else after the first VPD read. I don't think it's important that this reflect the size computed based on the VPD contents. I think it would be fine if it were set to 32K all the time and possibly set to zero by quirks on devices where VPD is completely broken.
Quoted 10 lines
drivers/pci/pci-sysfs.c +0
-0attr->attr.name ="vpd" ; attr->attr.mode =S_IRUSR |S_IWUSR ; attr->read = read_vpd_attr;Signature · 6 lines
1.8.5.6 -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-pci" in the body of a message to [email protected] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Re: [PATCHv2 3/4] pci: Determine actual VPD size on first access
Quoted 20 lines · Bjorn Helgaas
Quoted 19 lines · Hannes Reinecke
PCI-2.2 VPD entries have a maximum size of 32k, but might actually be smaller than that. To figure out the actual size one has to read the VPD area until the 'end marker' is reached.
Trying to read VPD data beyond that marker results in 'interesting' effects, from simple read errors to crashing the card. And to make matters worse not every PCI card implements this properly, leaving us with no 'end' marker or even completely invalid data. This path tries to determine the size of the VPD data. If no valid data can be read an I/O error will be returned when reading the sysfs attribute.Cc Alexander Duyck <[email protected]>Cc Bjorn Helgaas <[email protected]>Signed-off-by Hannes Reinecke <[email protected]>--- drivers/pci/access.c | 76 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- drivers/pci/pci-sysfs.c | 2 +- 2 files changed, 76 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
Quoted 14 lines
drivers/pci/access.c struct pci_vpd_pci22 { · line 287
Quoted 9 lines
drivers/pci/access.c +1
-0@@ -284,9 +284,65 @@ struct pci_vpd_pci22 {struct mutex lock;u16 flag;bool busy; +bool valid;You're just following the precedent here, but I think using "bool" in structures like this is pointless: it takes more space than a :1 field and doesn't really add any safety.
Okay, will be moving to a bitfield here.
Quoted 11 lines
drivers/pci/access.c struct pci_vpd_pci22 { · line 295
Quoted 8 lines
drivers/pci/access.c +5
-0u8 cap; }; +/** +* pci_vpd_size - determine actual size of Vital Product Data +* @dev: pci device struct +* @old_size: current assumed size, also maximum allowed size +* Superfluous empty line.
Ok.
Quoted 6 lines
drivers/pci/access.c struct pci_vpd_pci22 { · line 298
Quoted 3 lines
drivers/pci/access.c +3
-0+*/ +static size_t +pci_vpd_pci22_size (struct pci_dev *dev)Please follow indentation style of the file (all on one line).
Ok.
Quoted 18 lines
Quoted 18 lines
drivers/pci/access.c +18
-0+{ +size_t off =0 ; +unsigned char header[1 +2 ];/* 1 byte tag, 2 bytes length */ + +while (off <PCI_VPD_PCI22_SIZE && +pci_read_vpd (dev, off,1 , header) ==1 ) { +unsigned char tag; + +if (header[0 ] &PCI_VPD_LRDT ) { +/* Large Resource Data Type Tag */ + tag =pci_vpd_lrdt_tag (header); +/* Only read length from known tag items */ +if ((tag ==PCI_VPD_LTIN_ID_STRING ) || + (tag ==PCI_VPD_LTIN_RO_DATA ) || + (tag ==PCI_VPD_LTIN_RW_DATA )) { +if (pci_read_vpd (dev, off+1 ,2 , + &header[1 ]) !=2 ) { + dev_dbg(&dev->dev,
Quoted 9 lines
drivers/pci/access.c struct pci_vpd_pci22 { · line 319
Quoted 3 lines
drivers/pci/access.c +3
-0+"invalid large vpd tag %02x " +"size at offset %zu" , + tag, off + 1);The effect of this is that we set
vpd->base.lento 0, which will cause all VPD accesses to fail, right? If so, I'd make this at least adev_info(), maybe even adev_warn(). Thedev_dbg()may not appear in dmesg at all, depending on config options.
Wrong. Setting the length to '0' will just make the sysfs attribute appear with a length of '0', as we cannot determine the length when we create the attribute.
Quoted 3 lines
Capitalize "VPD" and concatenate all the strings, even if it exceeds 80 columns.
Okay.
Quoted 5 lines
drivers/pci/access.c struct pci_vpd_pci22 { · line 320
Quoted 1 line
drivers/pci/access.c +1
-0+break ;I think this leads to "return 0" below; I'd just return directly here so the reader doesn't have to figure out what we're breaking from.
Okay, can do.
Quoted 60 lines
Quoted 10 lines
drivers/pci/access.c +10
-0+ } + off +=PCI_VPD_LRDT_TAG_SIZE + +pci_vpd_lrdt_size (header); + } + }else { +/* Short Resource Data Type Tag */ + off +=PCI_VPD_SRDT_TAG_SIZE + +pci_vpd_srdt_size (header); + tag =pci_vpd_srdt_tag (header); + }drivers/pci/access.c struct pci_vpd_pci22 { · line 340
Quoted 10 lines
drivers/pci/access.c +10
-0+if (tag ==PCI_VPD_STIN_END )/* End tag descriptor */ +return off; +if ((tag !=PCI_VPD_LTIN_ID_STRING ) && + (tag !=PCI_VPD_LTIN_RO_DATA ) && + (tag !=PCI_VPD_LTIN_RW_DATA )) { +dev_dbg (&dev->dev, +"invalid %s vpd tag %02x at offset %zu" , + (header[0 ] &PCI_VPD_LRDT ) ?"large" :"short" , + tag, off); +break ;Same
dev_dbg()and break comment here.Quoted 37 lines
drivers/pci/access.c +20
-1+ } + } +return 0 ; +} +/* * Wait for last operation to complete. * This code has to spin since there is no other notification from the PCI @@ -337,9 +393,23 @@ static ssize_t pci_vpd_pci22_read(struct pci_dev *dev, loff_t pos, size_t count,loff_t end = pos + count;u8 *buf = arg; -if (pos <0 || pos > vpd->base.len || end > vpd->base.len) +if (pos <0 )return -EINVAL ; +if (!vpd->valid) { + vpd->valid = true; + vpd->base.len =pci_vpd_pci22_size (dev); + } +if (vpd->base.len ==0 ) +return -EIO ; + +if (end > vpd->base.len) { +if (pos > vpd->base.len) +return 0 ; + end = vpd->base.len; + count = end - pos; + } +if (mutex_lock_killable (&vpd->lock))return -EINTR ;@@ -389,6 +459,9 @@ static ssize_t pci_vpd_pci22_write(struct pci_dev *dev, loff_t pos, size_t countloff_t end = pos + count;int ret =0 ;
Quoted 6 lines
drivers/pci/access.c static ssize_t pci_vpd_pci22_write(struct pci_dev *dev, loff_t pos, size_t count · line 463
Quoted 2 lines
drivers/pci/access.c +2
-0+if (!vpd->valid) +return -EAGAIN ;Does this mean we now have to do a VPD read before a VPD write? That sounds like a new requirement that is non-obvious.
Hmm. I thought no-one would be daft enough to write a VPD attribute without first checking whether it actually _needs_ to be written to. But yeah, you're right. I'll be adding a call to pci_vpd_pci22_size() here.
Quoted 19 lines
Quoted 19 lines
drivers/pci/access.c +2
-0+if (pos <0 || (pos &3 ) || (count &3 ) || end > vpd->base.len)return -EINVAL ;@@ -496,6 +569,7 @@ int pci_vpd_pci22_init(struct pci_dev *dev)mutex_init (&vpd->lock); vpd->cap = cap; vpd->busy = false; + vpd->valid = false; dev->vpd = &vpd->base;return 0 ; }drivers/pci/pci-sysfs.c +0
-0@@ -1333,7 +1333,7 @@ static int pci_create_capabilities_sysfs(struct pci_dev *dev)return -ENOMEM ;
Quoted 12 lines
drivers/pci/pci-sysfs.c static int pci_create_capabilities_sysfs(struct pci_dev *dev) · line 1336
Quoted 3 lines
drivers/pci/pci-sysfs.c +1
-1sysfs_bin_attr_init (attr); - attr->size = dev->vpd->len; + attr->size =0 ;I'm still puzzled about how we're using
attr->size. I don't really want that size to change at run-time, i.e., I don't want it to be zero immediately after boot, then change to something else after the first VPD read. I don't think it's important that this reflect the size computed based on the VPD contents. I think it would be fine if it were set to 32K all the time and possibly set to zero by quirks on devices where VPD is completely broken.
The general idea is to always set the attribute size to '0' (ie the size reflected to userland via the sysfs attribute).
The _actual_ size of the VPD data is generated by a call to pci_vpd_pci22_size(), and stored in the vpd structure itself.
With that we won't need to change the sysfs attribute size (which we cannot do anyway), and don't need any quirks like modifying the return data for invalid VPD data.
But yeah, the sysfs zero-length binfile handling is non-obvious. It took me several days and a confused mail exchange with Alexander Duyck to figure it out.
Cheers,
Hannes
Signature · 5 lines
Dr. Hannes Reinecke Teamlead Storage & Networking [email protected] +49 911 74053 688 SUSE LINUX GmbH, Maxfeldstr. 5, 90409 Nürnberg GF: F. Imendörffer, J. Smithard, J. Guild, D. Upmanyu, G. Norton HRB 21284 (AG Nürnberg)
Re: [PATCHv2 3/4] pci: Determine actual VPD size on first access
In reply to Bjorn HelgaasQuoted 11 lines · Bjorn Helgaas
Quoted 10 lines · Hannes Reinecke
PCI-2.2 VPD entries have a maximum size of 32k, but might actually be smaller than that. To figure out the actual size one has to read the VPD area until the 'end marker' is reached.
Trying to read VPD data beyond that marker results in 'interesting' effects, from simple read errors to crashing the card. And to make matters worse not every PCI card implements this properly, leaving us with no 'end' marker or even completely invalid data. This path tries to determine the size of the VPD data. If no valid data can be read an I/O error will be returned when reading the sysfs attribute.
I have a problem with this particular feature as today VFIO uses this pci_vpd_xxxx API to virtualize access to VPD and the existing code assumes there is just one VPD block with 0x2 start and 0xf end. However I have at least one device where this is not true - "10 Gigabit Ethernet-SR PCI Express Adapter" - it has 2 blocks (made a script to read/parse it as /sys/bus/pci/devices/0001\:03\:00.0/vpd shows it wrong):
#0000 Large item 42 bytes; name 0x2 Identifier String #002d Large item 74 bytes; name 0x10
#007a Small item 1 bytes; name 0xf End Tag
---
#0c00 Large item 16 bytes; name 0x2 Identifier String #0c13 Large item 234 bytes; name 0x10
#0d00 Large item 252 bytes; name 0x11
#0dff Small item 0 bytes; name 0xf End Tag
The cxgb3 driver is reading the second bit starting from 0xc00 but since the size is wrongly detected as 0x7c, VFIO blocks access beyond it and the guest driver fails to probe.
I also cannot find a clause in the PCI 3.0 spec saying that there must be just a single block, is it there?
What would the correct fix be? Scanning all 32k of VPD is not an option I suppose as this is what this patch is trying to avoid. Thanks.
This is the device:
[aik@p81-p9 ~]$ sudo lspci -vvnns 0001:03:00.0
0001:03:00.0 Ethernet controller [0200]: Chelsio Communications Inc T310 10GbE Single Port Adapter [1425:0030]
Subsystem: IBM Device [1014:038c] Control: I/O- Mem+ BusMaster+ SpecCycle- MemWINV- VGASnoop- ParErr-
Stepping- SERR- FastB2B- DisINTx+
Status: Cap+ 66MHz- UDF- FastB2B- ParErr- DEVSEL=fast >TAbort- <TAbort-
<MAbort- >SERR- <PERR- INTx-
Latency: 0
Interrupt: pin A routed to IRQ 494
Region 0: Memory at 3fe080880000 (64-bit, non-prefetchable) [size=4K] Region 2: Memory at 3fe080000000 (64-bit, non-prefetchable) [size=8M] Region 4: Memory at 3fe080881000 (64-bit, non-prefetchable) [size=4K] [virtual] Expansion ROM at 3fe080800000 [disabled] [size=512K]
Capabilities: [40] Power Management version 3
Flags: PMEClk- DSI- D1- D2- AuxCurrent=0mA PME(D0+,D1-,D2-,D3hot+,D3cold-)
Status: D0 NoSoftRst- PME-Enable- DSel=0 DScale=0 PME-
Capabilities: [48] MSI: Enable- Count=1/32 Maskable- 64bit+
Address: 0000000000000000 Data: 0000
Capabilities: [58] Express (v2) Endpoint, MSI 00
DevCap: MaxPayload 4096 bytes, PhantFunc 0, Latency L0s <64ns, L1 <1us
ExtTag+ AttnBtn- AttnInd- PwrInd- RBE+ FLReset-
DevCtl: Report errors: Correctable- Non-Fatal+ Fatal+ Unsupported+
RlxdOrd+ ExtTag- PhantFunc- AuxPwr- NoSnoop+ MaxPayload 256 bytes, MaxReadReq 512 bytes
DevSta: CorrErr- UncorrErr- FatalErr- UnsuppReq- AuxPwr- TransPend-
LnkCap: Port #0, Speed 2.5GT/s, Width x8, ASPM L0s L1, Exit Latency L0s
unlimited, L1 unlimited
ClockPM- Surprise- LLActRep- BwNot- ASPMOptComp-
LnkCtl: ASPM Disabled; RCB 64 bytes Disabled- CommClk-
ExtSynch- ClockPM- AutWidDis- BWInt- AutBWInt-
LnkSta: Speed 2.5GT/s, Width x8, TrErr- Train- SlotClk+ DLActive- BWMgmt-
ABWMgmt-
DevCap2: Completion Timeout: Range ABC, TimeoutDis-, LTR-, OBFF Not Supported
DevCtl2: Completion Timeout: 50us to 50ms, TimeoutDis-, LTR-, OBFF Disabled
LnkCtl2: Target Link Speed: 2.5GT/s, EnterCompliance- SpeedDis-
Transmit Margin: Normal Operating Range, EnterModifiedCompliance-
ComplianceSOS-
Compliance De-emphasis: -6dB
LnkSta2: Current De-emphasis Level: -6dB, EqualizationComplete-,
EqualizationPhase1-
EqualizationPhase2-, EqualizationPhase3-, LinkEqualizationRequest- Capabilities: [94] Vital Product Data Product Name: 10 Gigabit Ethernet-SR PCI Express Adapter Read-only fields: [EC] Engineering changes: D76809 [FN] Unknown: 34 36 4b 37 38 39 37 [PN] Part number: 46K7897 [MN] Manufacture ID: 31 30 33 37 [FC] Unknown: 35 37 36 39 [SN] Serial number: YL102035603V [NA] Unknown: 30 30 31 34 35 45 39 39 32 45 44 31 End Capabilities: [9c] MSI-X: Enable+ Count=32 Masked- Vector table: BAR=4 offset=00000000 PBA: BAR=4 offset=00000800 Capabilities: [100 v1] Device Serial Number 00-00-00-01-00-00-00-01 Capabilities: [300 v1] Advanced Error Reporting UESta: DLP- SDES- TLP- FCP- CmpltTO- CmpltAbrt- UnxCmplt- RxOF- MalfTLP-
ECRC- UnsupReq- ACSViol-
UEMsk: DLP- SDES- TLP- FCP- CmpltTO- CmpltAbrt- UnxCmplt- RxOF- MalfTLP-
ECRC- UnsupReq- ACSViol-
UESvrt: DLP+ SDES+ TLP- FCP+ CmpltTO- CmpltAbrt- UnxCmplt- RxOF+ MalfTLP+
ECRC- UnsupReq- ACSViol-
CESta: RxErr- BadTLP- BadDLLP- Rollover- Timeout- NonFatalErr-
CEMsk: RxErr- BadTLP- BadDLLP- Rollover- Timeout- NonFatalErr+
AERCap: First Error Pointer: 00, GenCap+ CGenEn- ChkCap+ ChkEn-
Kernel driver in use: cxgb3
Kernel modules: cxgb3
Quoted 187 lines
Quoted 14 lines
Cc Alexander Duyck <[email protected]>Cc Bjorn Helgaas <[email protected]>Signed-off-by Hannes Reinecke <[email protected]>--- drivers/pci/access.c | 76 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- drivers/pci/pci-sysfs.c | 2 +- 2 files changed, 76 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)drivers/pci/access.c +0
-0drivers/pci/access.c struct pci_vpd_pci22 { · line 287
Quoted 4 lines
drivers/pci/access.c +1
-0@@ -284,9 +284,65 @@ struct pci_vpd_pci22 {struct mutex lock;u16 flag;bool busy; +bool valid;You're just following the precedent here, but I think using "bool" in structures like this is pointless: it takes more space than a :1 field and doesn't really add any safety.
drivers/pci/access.c struct pci_vpd_pci22 { · line 295
Quoted 8 lines
drivers/pci/access.c +5
-0u8 cap; }; +/** +* pci_vpd_size - determine actual size of Vital Product Data +* @dev: pci device struct +* @old_size: current assumed size, also maximum allowed size +* Superfluous empty line.
drivers/pci/access.c struct pci_vpd_pci22 { · line 298
Quoted 3 lines
drivers/pci/access.c +3
-0+*/ +static size_t +pci_vpd_pci22_size (struct pci_dev *dev)Please follow indentation style of the file (all on one line).
Quoted 11 lines
drivers/pci/access.c +11
-0+{ +size_t off =0 ; +unsigned char header[1 +2 ];/* 1 byte tag, 2 bytes length */ + +while (off <PCI_VPD_PCI22_SIZE && +pci_read_vpd (dev, off,1 , header) ==1 ) { +unsigned char tag; + +if (header[0 ] &PCI_VPD_LRDT ) { +/* Large Resource Data Type Tag */ + tag =pci_vpd_lrdt_tag (header);drivers/pci/access.c struct pci_vpd_pci22 { · line 319
Quoted 10 lines
drivers/pci/access.c +10
-0+/* Only read length from known tag items */ +if ((tag ==PCI_VPD_LTIN_ID_STRING ) || + (tag ==PCI_VPD_LTIN_RO_DATA ) || + (tag ==PCI_VPD_LTIN_RW_DATA )) { +if (pci_read_vpd (dev, off+1 ,2 , + &header[1 ]) !=2 ) { +dev_dbg (&dev->dev, +"invalid large vpd tag %02x " +"size at offset %zu" , + tag, off +1 );The effect of this is that we set
vpd->base.lento 0, which will cause all VPD accesses to fail, right? If so, I'd make this at least adev_info(), maybe even adev_warn(). Thedev_dbg()may not appear in dmesg at all, depending on config options.Capitalize "VPD" and concatenate all the strings, even if it exceeds 80 columns.
drivers/pci/access.c struct pci_vpd_pci22 { · line 320
Quoted 1 line
drivers/pci/access.c +1
-0+break ;I think this leads to "return 0" below; I'd just return directly here so the reader doesn't have to figure out what we're breaking from.
Quoted 10 lines
drivers/pci/access.c +10
-0+ } + off +=PCI_VPD_LRDT_TAG_SIZE + +pci_vpd_lrdt_size (header); + } + }else { +/* Short Resource Data Type Tag */ + off +=PCI_VPD_SRDT_TAG_SIZE + +pci_vpd_srdt_size (header); + tag =pci_vpd_srdt_tag (header); + }drivers/pci/access.c struct pci_vpd_pci22 { · line 340
Quoted 10 lines
drivers/pci/access.c +10
-0+if (tag ==PCI_VPD_STIN_END )/* End tag descriptor */ +return off; +if ((tag !=PCI_VPD_LTIN_ID_STRING ) && + (tag !=PCI_VPD_LTIN_RO_DATA ) && + (tag !=PCI_VPD_LTIN_RW_DATA )) { +dev_dbg (&dev->dev, +"invalid %s vpd tag %02x at offset %zu" , + (header[0 ] &PCI_VPD_LRDT ) ?"large" :"short" , + tag, off); +break ;Same
dev_dbg()and break comment here.Quoted 34 lines
drivers/pci/access.c +20
-1+ } + } +return 0 ; +} +/* * Wait for last operation to complete. * This code has to spin since there is no other notification from the PCI @@ -337,9 +393,23 @@ static ssize_t pci_vpd_pci22_read(struct pci_dev *dev, loff_t pos, size_t count,loff_t end = pos + count;u8 *buf = arg; -if (pos <0 || pos > vpd->base.len || end > vpd->base.len) +if (pos <0 )return -EINVAL ; +if (!vpd->valid) { + vpd->valid = true; + vpd->base.len =pci_vpd_pci22_size (dev); + } +if (vpd->base.len ==0 ) +return -EIO ; + +if (end > vpd->base.len) { +if (pos > vpd->base.len) +return 0 ; + end = vpd->base.len; + count = end - pos; + } +if (mutex_lock_killable (&vpd->lock))return -EINTR ;drivers/pci/access.c static ssize_t pci_vpd_pci22_write(struct pci_dev *dev, loff_t pos, size_t count · line 463
Quoted 5 lines
drivers/pci/access.c +2
-0@@ -389,6 +459,9 @@ static ssize_t pci_vpd_pci22_write(struct pci_dev *dev, loff_t pos, size_t countloff_t end = pos + count;int ret =0 ; +if (!vpd->valid) +return -EAGAIN ;Does this mean we now have to do a VPD read before a VPD write? That sounds like a new requirement that is non-obvious.
Quoted 17 lines
drivers/pci/access.c +2
-0+if (pos <0 || (pos &3 ) || (count &3 ) || end > vpd->base.len)return -EINVAL ;@@ -496,6 +569,7 @@ int pci_vpd_pci22_init(struct pci_dev *dev)mutex_init (&vpd->lock); vpd->cap = cap; vpd->busy = false; + vpd->valid = false; dev->vpd = &vpd->base;return 0 ; }drivers/pci/pci-sysfs.c +0
-0drivers/pci/pci-sysfs.c static int pci_create_capabilities_sysfs(struct pci_dev *dev) · line 1336
Quoted 5 lines
drivers/pci/pci-sysfs.c +1
-1@@ -1333,7 +1333,7 @@ static int pci_create_capabilities_sysfs(struct pci_dev *dev)return -ENOMEM ;sysfs_bin_attr_init (attr); - attr->size = dev->vpd->len; + attr->size =0 ;I'm still puzzled about how we're using
attr->size. I don't really want that size to change at run-time, i.e., I don't want it to be zero immediately after boot, then change to something else after the first VPD read. I don't think it's important that this reflect the size computed based on the VPD contents. I think it would be fine if it were set to 32K all the time and possibly set to zero by quirks on devices where VPD is completely broken.Quoted 10 lines
drivers/pci/pci-sysfs.c +0
-0attr->attr.name ="vpd" ; attr->attr.mode =S_IRUSR |S_IWUSR ; attr->read = read_vpd_attr;Signature · 6 lines
1.8.5.6 -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-pci" in the body of a message to [email protected] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-pci" in the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Signature · 1 line
Alexey
Re: [PATCHv2 3/4] pci: Determine actual VPD size on first access
Quoted 14 lines · Alexey Kardashevskiy
Quoted 11 lines · Bjorn Helgaas
Quoted 10 lines · Hannes Reinecke
PCI-2.2 VPD entries have a maximum size of 32k, but might actually be smaller than that. To figure out the actual size one has to read the VPD area until the 'end marker' is reached.
Trying to read VPD data beyond that marker results in 'interesting' effects, from simple read errors to crashing the card. And to make matters worse not every PCI card implements this properly, leaving us with no 'end' marker or even completely invalid data. This path tries to determine the size of the VPD data. If no valid data can be read an I/O error will be returned when reading the sysfs attribute.
Quoted 6 lines
I have a problem with this particular feature as today VFIO uses this
pci_vpd_xxxxAPI to virtualize access to VPD and the existing code assumes there is just one VPD block with0x2start and0xfend. However I have at least one device where this is not true - "10 Gigabit Ethernet-SR PCI Express Adapter" - it has 2 blocks (made a script to read/parse it as /sys/bus/pci/devices/0001\:03\:00.0/vpd shows it wrong):
The PCI spec is what essentially assumes that there is only one block. If I am not mistaken in the case of this device the second block here actually contains device configuration data, not actual VPD data. The issue here is that the second block is being accessed as VPD when it isn't.
Quoted 8 lines
#0000 Large item 42 bytes; name
0x2Identifier String #002d Large item 74 bytes; name0x10
#007a Small item 1 bytes; name0xfEnd Tag
---
#0c00 Large item 16 bytes; name0x2Identifier String #0c13 Large item 234 bytes; name0x10
#0d00 Large item 252 bytes; name0x11
#0dff Small item 0 bytes; name0xfEnd Tag
The second block here is driver proprietary setup bits.
Quoted 6 lines
The cxgb3 driver is reading the second bit starting from
0xc00but since the size is wrongly detected as0x7c, VFIO blocks access beyond it and the guest driver fails to probe.I also cannot find a clause in the PCI 3.0 spec saying that there must be just a single block, is it there?
The problem is we need to be able to parse it. The spec defines a series of tags that can be used starting at offset 0. That is how we are supposed to get around through the VPD data. The problem is we can't have more than one end tag and what appears to be happening here is that we are defining a second block of data which uses the same formatting as VPD but is not VPD.
Quoted 2 lines
What would the correct fix be? Scanning all 32k of VPD is not an option I suppose as this is what this patch is trying to avoid. Thanks.
I adding the current cxgb3 maintainer and netdev list to the Cc. This is something that can probably be addressed via a PCI quirk as what needs to happen is that we need to extend the VPD in the case of this part in order to include this second block. As long as we can read the VPD data all the way out to 0xdff odds are we could probably just have the size arbitrarily increased to 0xe00 via the quirk and then you would be able to access all of the VPD for the device. We already have code making other modifications to drivers/pci/quirks.c for several Broadcom devices and probably just need something similar to allow extended access in the case of these devices.
Quoted 76 lines
This is the device:
[aik@p81-p9 ~]$ sudo lspci -vvnns 0001:03:00.0
0001:03:00.0 Ethernet controller [0200]: Chelsio Communications Inc T310
10GbE Single Port Adapter [1425:0030]
Subsystem: IBM Device [1014:038c]
Control: I/O- Mem+ BusMaster+ SpecCycle- MemWINV- VGASnoop- ParErr-
Stepping- SERR- FastB2B- DisINTx+
Status: Cap+ 66MHz- UDF- FastB2B- ParErr- DEVSEL=fast >TAbort- <TAbort-
<MAbort- >SERR- <PERR- INTx-
Latency: 0
Interrupt: pin A routed to IRQ 494
Region 0: Memory at3fe080880000(64-bit, non-prefetchable) [size=4K] Region 2: Memory at3fe080000000(64-bit, non-prefetchable) [size=8M] Region 4: Memory at3fe080881000(64-bit, non-prefetchable) [size=4K] [virtual] Expansion ROM at3fe080800000[disabled] [size=512K]
Capabilities: [40] Power Management version 3
Flags: PMEClk- DSI- D1- D2- AuxCurrent=0mAPME(D0+,D1-,D2-,D3hot+,D3cold-)
Status: D0 NoSoftRst- PME-Enable- DSel=0 DScale=0 PME-
Capabilities: [48] MSI: Enable- Count=1/32 Maskable- 64bit+
Address: 0000000000000000 Data: 0000
Capabilities: [58] Express (v2) Endpoint, MSI 00
DevCap: MaxPayload 4096 bytes, PhantFunc 0, Latency L0s <64ns, L1 <1us
ExtTag+ AttnBtn- AttnInd- PwrInd- RBE+ FLReset-
DevCtl: Report errors: Correctable- Non-Fatal+ Fatal+ Unsupported+
RlxdOrd+ ExtTag- PhantFunc- AuxPwr- NoSnoop+ MaxPayload 256 bytes, MaxReadReq 512 bytes
DevSta: CorrErr- UncorrErr- FatalErr- UnsuppReq- AuxPwr- TransPend-
LnkCap: Port #0, Speed 2.5GT/s, Width x8, ASPM L0s L1, Exit Latency L0s
unlimited, L1 unlimited
ClockPM- Surprise- LLActRep- BwNot- ASPMOptComp-
LnkCtl: ASPM Disabled; RCB 64 bytes Disabled- CommClk-
ExtSynch- ClockPM- AutWidDis- BWInt- AutBWInt-
LnkSta: Speed 2.5GT/s, Width x8, TrErr- Train- SlotClk+ DLActive- BWMgmt-
ABWMgmt-
DevCap2: Completion Timeout: Range ABC, TimeoutDis-, LTR-, OBFF Not Supported
DevCtl2: Completion Timeout: 50us to 50ms, TimeoutDis-, LTR-, OBFF Disabled
LnkCtl2: Target Link Speed: 2.5GT/s, EnterCompliance- SpeedDis-
Transmit Margin: Normal Operating Range, EnterModifiedCompliance-
ComplianceSOS-
Compliance De-emphasis: -6dB
LnkSta2: Current De-emphasis Level: -6dB, EqualizationComplete-,
EqualizationPhase1-EqualizationPhase2-, EqualizationPhase3-, LinkEqualizationRequest- Capabilities: [94] Vital Product Data Product Name: 10 Gigabit Ethernet-SR PCI Express Adapter Read-only fields: [EC] Engineering changes: D76809 [FN] Unknown: 34 36 4b 37 38 39 37 [PN] Part number: 46K7897 [MN] Manufacture ID: 31 30 33 37 [FC] Unknown: 35 37 36 39 [SN] Serial number: YL102035603V [NA] Unknown: 30 30 31 34 35 45 39 39 32 45 44 31 End Capabilities: [9c] MSI-X: Enable+ Count=32 Masked- Vector table: BAR=4 offset=00000000 PBA: BAR=4 offset=00000800 Capabilities: [100 v1] Device Serial Number 00-00-00-01-00-00-00-01 Capabilities: [300 v1] Advanced Error Reporting UESta: DLP- SDES- TLP- FCP- CmpltTO- CmpltAbrt- UnxCmplt- RxOF- MalfTLP-ECRC- UnsupReq- ACSViol-
UEMsk: DLP- SDES- TLP- FCP- CmpltTO- CmpltAbrt- UnxCmplt- RxOF- MalfTLP-
ECRC- UnsupReq- ACSViol-
UESvrt: DLP+ SDES+ TLP- FCP+ CmpltTO- CmpltAbrt- UnxCmplt- RxOF+ MalfTLP+
ECRC- UnsupReq- ACSViol-
CESta: RxErr- BadTLP- BadDLLP- Rollover- Timeout- NonFatalErr-
CEMsk: RxErr- BadTLP- BadDLLP- Rollover- Timeout- NonFatalErr+
AERCap: First Error Pointer: 00, GenCap+ CGenEn- ChkCap+ ChkEn-
Kernel driver in use: cxgb3
Kernel modules: cxgb3
Re: [PATCHv2 3/4] pci: Determine actual VPD size on first access
Quoted 6 lines · Alexander Duyck
The PCI spec is what essentially assumes that there is only one block. If I am not mistaken in the case of this device the second block here actually contains device configuration data, not actual VPD data. The issue here is that the second block is being accessed as VPD when it isn't.
Devices do funny things with config space, film at 11. VFIO trying to be the middle man and intercept/interpret things is broken, cannot work, will never work, will just results in lots and lots of useless code, but I've been singing that song for too long and nobody seems to care...
Quoted 10 lines
Quoted 8 lines
Quoted 1 line
#0000 Large item 42 bytes; name
0x2Identifier String#002d Large item 74 bytes; name
0x10
#007a Small item 1 bytes; name0xfEnd Tag
---
#0c00 Large item 16 bytes; name0x2Identifier String #0c13 Large item 234 bytes; name0x10
#0d00 Large item 252 bytes; name0x11
#0dff Small item 0 bytes; name0xfEnd TagThe second block here is driver proprietary setup bits.
Right. They happen to be in VPD on this device. They an be elsewhere on other devices. In between capabilities on some, in vendor caps on others...
Quoted 8 lines
Quoted 8 lines
Quoted 1 line
The cxgb3 driver is reading the second bit starting from
0xc00but sincethe size is wrongly detected as
0x7c, VFIO blocks access beyond it and the guest driver fails to probe.I also cannot find a clause in the PCI 3.0 spec saying that there must be just a single block, is it there?
The problem is we need to be able to parse it.
We can parse the standard part for generic stuff like inventory tools or lsvpd, but we shouldn't get in the way of the driver poking at its device.
Quoted 98 lines
The spec defines a
series of tags that can be used starting at offset 0. That is how we are supposed to get around through the VPD data. The problem is we can't have more than one end tag and what appears to be happening here is that we are defining a second block of data which uses the same formatting as VPD but is not VPD.Quoted 2 lines
What would the correct fix be? Scanning all 32k of VPD is not an option I suppose as this is what this patch is trying to avoid. Thanks.
I adding the current cxgb3 maintainer and netdev list to the Cc. This is something that can probably be addressed via a PCI quirk as what needs to happen is that we need to extend the VPD in the case of this part in order to include this second block. As long as we can read the VPD data all the way out to
0xdffodds are we could probably just have the size arbitrarily increased to0xe00via the quirk and then you would be able to access all of the VPD for the device. We already have code making other modifications todrivers/pci/quirks.cfor several Broadcom devices and probably just need something similar to allow extended access in the case of these devices.Quoted 76 lines
Quoted 1 line
This is the device:
Quoted 1 line
[aik@p81-p9 ~]$ sudo lspci -vvnns 0001:03:00.0
0001:03:00.0 Ethernet controller [0200]: Chelsio Communications Inc T310
10GbE Single Port Adapter [1425:0030]
Subsystem: IBM Device [1014:038c]
Control: I/O- Mem+ BusMaster+ SpecCycle- MemWINV- VGASnoop- ParErr- Stepping- SERR- FastB2B- DisINTx+
Status: Cap+ 66MHz- UDF- FastB2B- ParErr- DEVSEL=fast >TAbort- <TAbort- <MAbort- >SERR- <PERR- INTx-
Latency: 0
Interrupt: pin A routed to IRQ 494
Region 0: Memory at3fe080880000(64-bit, non-prefetchable) [size=4K] Region 2: Memory at3fe080000000(64-bit, non-prefetchable) [size=8M] Region 4: Memory at3fe080881000(64-bit, non-prefetchable) [size=4K] [virtual] Expansion ROM at3fe080800000[disabled] [size=512K]
Capabilities: [40] Power Management version 3
Flags: PMEClk- DSI- D1- D2- AuxCurrent=0mAPME(D0+,D1-,D2-,D3hot+,D3cold-)
Status: D0 NoSoftRst- PME-Enable- DSel=0 DScale=0 PME-
Capabilities: [48] MSI: Enable- Count=1/32 Maskable- 64bit+
Address: 0000000000000000 Data: 0000
Capabilities: [58] Express (v2) Endpoint, MSI 00
DevCap: MaxPayload 4096 bytes, PhantFunc 0, Latency L0s <64ns, L1 <1us ExtTag+ AttnBtn- AttnInd- PwrInd- RBE+ FLReset-
DevCtl: Report errors: Correctable- Non-Fatal+ Fatal+ Unsupported+ RlxdOrd+ ExtTag- PhantFunc- AuxPwr- NoSnoop+ MaxPayload 256 bytes, MaxReadReq 512 bytes
DevSta: CorrErr- UncorrErr- FatalErr- UnsuppReq- AuxPwr- TransPend-
LnkCap: Port #0, Speed 2.5GT/s, Width x8, ASPM L0s L1, Exit Latency L0s unlimited, L1 unlimited
ClockPM- Surprise- LLActRep- BwNot- ASPMOptComp-
LnkCtl: ASPM Disabled; RCB 64 bytes Disabled- CommClk- ExtSynch- ClockPM- AutWidDis- BWInt- AutBWInt-
LnkSta: Speed 2.5GT/s, Width x8, TrErr- Train- SlotClk+ DLActive- BWMgmt- ABWMgmt-
DevCap2: Completion Timeout: Range ABC, TimeoutDis-, LTR-, OBFF Not Supported
DevCtl2: Completion Timeout: 50us to 50ms, TimeoutDis-, LTR-, OBFF Disabled
LnkCtl2: Target Link Speed: 2.5GT/s, EnterCompliance- SpeedDis- Transmit Margin: Normal Operating Range, EnterModifiedCompliance- ComplianceSOS-
Compliance De-emphasis: -6dB
LnkSta2: Current De-emphasis Level: -6dB, EqualizationComplete-, EqualizationPhase1-
EqualizationPhase2-, EqualizationPhase3-, LinkEqualizationRequest-
Capabilities: [94] Vital Product Data
Product Name: 10 Gigabit Ethernet-SR PCI Express Adapter Read-only fields:
[EC] Engineering changes: D76809
[FN] Unknown: 34 36 4b 37 38 39 37
[PN] Part number: 46K7897
[MN] Manufacture ID: 31 30 33 37
[FC] Unknown: 35 37 36 39
[SN] Serial number: YL102035603V
[NA] Unknown: 30 30 31 34 35 45 39 39 32 45 44 31
End
Capabilities: [9c] MSI-X: Enable+ Count=32 Masked-
Vector table: BAR=4 offset=00000000
PBA: BAR=4 offset=00000800
Capabilities: [100 v1] Device Serial Number 00-00-00-01-00-00-00-01
Capabilities: [300 v1] Advanced Error Reporting
UESta: DLP- SDES- TLP- FCP- CmpltTO- CmpltAbrt- UnxCmplt- RxOF- MalfTLP- ECRC- UnsupReq- ACSViol-
UEMsk: DLP- SDES- TLP- FCP- CmpltTO- CmpltAbrt- UnxCmplt- RxOF- MalfTLP- ECRC- UnsupReq- ACSViol-
UESvrt: DLP+ SDES+ TLP- FCP+ CmpltTO- CmpltAbrt- UnxCmplt- RxOF+ MalfTLP+ ECRC- UnsupReq- ACSViol-
CESta: RxErr- BadTLP- BadDLLP- Rollover- Timeout- NonFatalErr- CEMsk: RxErr- BadTLP- BadDLLP- Rollover- Timeout- NonFatalErr+
AERCap: First Error Pointer: 00, GenCap+ CGenEn- ChkCap+ ChkEn- Kernel driver in use: cxgb3
Kernel modules: cxgb3
Re: [PATCHv2 3/4] pci: Determine actual VPD size on first access
Quoted 31 lines · Benjamin Herrenschmidt
Quoted 6 lines · Alexander Duyck
The PCI spec is what essentially assumes that there is only one block. If I am not mistaken in the case of this device the second block here actually contains device configuration data, not actual VPD data. The issue here is that the second block is being accessed as VPD when it isn't.
Devices do funny things with config space, film at 11. VFIO trying to be the middle man and intercept/interpret things is broken, cannot work, will never work, will just results in lots and lots of useless code, but I've been singing that song for too long and nobody seems to care...
Quoted 10 lines
Quoted 8 lines
Quoted 1 line
#0000 Large item 42 bytes; name
0x2Identifier String#002d Large item 74 bytes; name
0x10
#007a Small item 1 bytes; name0xfEnd Tag
---
#0c00 Large item 16 bytes; name0x2Identifier String #0c13 Large item 234 bytes; name0x10
#0d00 Large item 252 bytes; name0x11
#0dff Small item 0 bytes; name0xfEnd TagThe second block here is driver proprietary setup bits.
Right. They happen to be in VPD on this device. They an be elsewhere on other devices. In between capabilities on some, in vendor caps on others...
Quoted 4 lines
Quoted 4 lines
Quoted 1 line
The cxgb3 driver is reading the second bit starting from
0xc00but sincethe size is wrongly detected as
0x7c, VFIO blocks access beyond it and the guest driver fails to probe.
Quoted 8 lines
Quoted 4 lines
Quoted 4 lines
I also cannot find a clause in the PCI 3.0 spec saying that there must be just a single block, is it there?
The problem is we need to be able to parse it.
We can parse the standard part for generic stuff like inventory tools or lsvpd, but we shouldn't get in the way of the driver poking at its device.
If we add the quirk to the kernel that reports the VPD for this device is the actual size of both blocks then we wouldn't be blocking the VPD access like we currently are.
The problem is if we don't do this it becomes possible for a guest to essentially cripple a device on the host by just accessing VPD regions that aren't actually viable on many devices. We are much better off in terms of security and stability if we restrict access to what should be accessible. In this case what has happened is that the vendor threw in an extra out-of-spec block and just expected it to work. In order to work around it we just need to add a small function to drivers/pci/quirks.c that would update the VPD size reported so that it matches what the hardware is actually providing instead of what we can determine based on the VPD layout.
Really working around something like this is not much different than what we would have to do if the vendor had stuffed the data in some reserved section of their PCI configuration space. We end up needing to add special quirks any time a vendor goes out-of-spec for some one-off configuration interface that only they are ever going to use.
- Alex
Re: [PATCHv2 3/4] pci: Determine actual VPD size on first access
Quoted 4 lines · Alexander Duyck
The problem is if we don't do this it becomes possible for a guest to essentially cripple a device on the host by just accessing VPD regions that aren't actually viable on many devices.
And ? We already can cripple the device in so many different ways simpy because we have pretty much full BAR access to it...
Quoted 3 lines
We are much better off
in terms of security and stability if we restrict access to what should be accessible.
Bollox. I've heard that argument over and over again, it never stood and still doesn't.
We have full BAR access for god sake. We can already destroy the device in many cases (think: reflashing microcode, internal debug bus access with a route to the config space, voltage/freq control ....).
We aren't protecting anything more here, we are just adding layers of bloat, complication and bugs.
Quoted 3 lines
In this case what has happened is that the
vendor threw in an extra out-of-spec block and just expected it to work.
Like vendors do all the time in all sort of places
I still completely fail to see the point in acting as a filtering middle man.
Quoted 8 lines
In order to work around it we just need to add a small function to
drivers/pci/quirks.cthat would update the VPD size reported so that it matches what the hardware is actually providing instead of what we can determine based on the VPD layout.Really working around something like this is not much different than what we would have to do if the vendor had stuffed the data in some reserved section of their PCI configuration space.
It is, in both cases we shouldn't have VFIO or the host involved. We should just let the guest config space accesses go through.
Quoted 3 lines
We end up needing
to add special quirks any time a vendor goes out-of-spec for some one-off configuration interface that only they are ever going to use.
Cheers,
Ben.
Re: [PATCHv2 3/4] pci: Determine actual VPD size on first access
Quoted 16 lines · Benjamin Herrenschmidt
Quoted 4 lines · Alexander Duyck
The problem is if we don't do this it becomes possible for a guest to essentially cripple a device on the host by just accessing VPD regions that aren't actually viable on many devices.
And ? We already can cripple the device in so many different ways simpy because we have pretty much full BAR access to it...
Quoted 3 lines
We are much better off
in terms of security and stability if we restrict access to what should be accessible.Bollox. I've heard that argument over and over again, it never stood and still doesn't.
Quoted 6 lines
We have full BAR access for god sake. We can already destroy the device in many cases (think: reflashing microcode, internal debug bus access with a route to the config space, voltage/freq control ....).
We aren't protecting anything more here, we are just adding layers of bloat, complication and bugs.
To some extent I can agree with you. I don't know if we should be restricting the VFIO based interface the same way we restrict systemd from accessing this region. In the case of VFIO maybe we need to look at a different approach for accessing this. Perhaps we need a privileged version of the VPD accessors that could be used by things like VFIO and the cxgb3 driver since they are assumed to be a bit smarter than those interfaces that were just trying to slurp up something like 4K of VPD data.
Quoted 8 lines
Quoted 3 lines
In this case what has happened is that the
vendor threw in an extra out-of-spec block and just expected it to work.Like vendors do all the time in all sort of places
I still completely fail to see the point in acting as a filtering middle man.
The problem is we are having to do some filtering because things like systemd were using dumb accessors that were trying to suck down 4K of VPD data instead of trying to parse through and read it a field at a time.
Quoted 12 lines
Quoted 8 lines
In order to work around it we just need to add a small function to
drivers/pci/quirks.cthat would update the VPD size reported so that it matches what the hardware is actually providing instead of what we can determine based on the VPD layout.Really working around something like this is not much different than what we would have to do if the vendor had stuffed the data in some reserved section of their PCI configuration space.
It is, in both cases we shouldn't have VFIO or the host involved. We should just let the guest config space accesses go through.
Quoted 6 lines
Quoted 3 lines
We end up needing
to add special quirks any time a vendor goes out-of-spec for some one-off configuration interface that only they are ever going to use.Cheers,
Ben.
If you have a suggestion on how to resolve this patches are always welcome. Otherwise I think the simpler approach to fixing this without re-introducing the existing bugs is to just add the quirk. I will try to get to it sometime this weekend if nobody else does. It should be pretty straight foward, but I just don't have the time to pull up a kernel and generate a patch right now.
- Alex
Re: [PATCHv2 3/4] pci: Determine actual VPD size on first access
Quoted 40 lines · On Thu, 11 Aug 2016 11:52:02 -0700 Alexander Duyck <[email protected]>…
Quoted 16 lines · Benjamin Herrenschmidt
Quoted 4 lines · Alexander Duyck
The problem is if we don't do this it becomes possible for a guest to essentially cripple a device on the host by just accessing VPD regions that aren't actually viable on many devices.
And ? We already can cripple the device in so many different ways simpy because we have pretty much full BAR access to it...
Quoted 3 lines
We are much better off
in terms of security and stability if we restrict access to what should be accessible.Bollox. I've heard that argument over and over again, it never stood and still doesn't.
Quoted 6 lines
We have full BAR access for god sake. We can already destroy the device in many cases (think: reflashing microcode, internal debug bus access with a route to the config space, voltage/freq control ....).
We aren't protecting anything more here, we are just adding layers of bloat, complication and bugs.
To some extent I can agree with you. I don't know if we should be restricting the VFIO based interface the same way we restrict systemd from accessing this region. In the case of VFIO maybe we need to look at a different approach for accessing this. Perhaps we need a privileged version of the VPD accessors that could be used by things like VFIO and the cxgb3 driver since they are assumed to be a bit smarter than those interfaces that were just trying to slurp up something like 4K of VPD data.
Quoted 6 lines
Quoted 3 lines
In this case what has happened is that the
vendor threw in an extra out-of-spec block and just expected it to work.Like vendors do all the time in all sort of places
Quoted 7 lines
Quoted 2 lines
I still completely fail to see the point in acting as a filtering middle man.
The problem is we are having to do some filtering because things like systemd were using dumb accessors that were trying to suck down 4K of VPD data instead of trying to parse through and read it a field at a time.
vfio isn't playing nanny here for the fun of it, part of the reason we have vpd access functions is because folks have discovered that vpd registers between PCI functions on multi-function devices may be shared. So pounding on vpd registers for function 1 may adversely affect someone else reading from a different function. This is a case where I feel vfio needs to step in because if that's a user competing with the host or two users stepping on each other, well that's exactly what vfio tries to prevent. A driver in userspace or a VM driver can't very well determine these sorts of interactions when it only has visibility to a subset of the functions and users and hardware folks would throw a fit if I extended iommu groups to encompass all the related devices rather than take the relatively simple step of virtualizing these accesses and occasionally quirking devices that are extra broken, as seems to be required here. Thanks,
Alex
Re: [PATCHv2 3/4] pci: Determine actual VPD size on first access
Quoted 6 lines · Alex Williamson
vfio isn't playing nanny here for the fun of it, part of the reason we have vpd access functions is because folks have discovered that vpd registers between PCI functions on multi-function devices may be shared. So pounding on vpd registers for function 1 may adversely
Quoted 1 line
affect someone else reading from a different function.
A lot more than that may be shared... the bus for example. lots of devices have backdoors into their own BARs, one partition can make its BARs overlap the neighbour function, ... dang !
In the end, PCI assignment at a granularity smaller than a bus cannot be done in a fully air tight way and shouldn't be relied upon in environemnt where the isolation between partitions matters.
The only exception here is SR-IOV of course since it's designed specifically so that the VFs can't be messed with.
Quoted 10 lines
This is a case
where I feel vfio needs to step in because if that's a user competing with the host or two users stepping on each other, well that's exactly what vfio tries to prevent. A driver in userspace or a VM driver can't very well determine these sorts of interactions when it only has visibility to a subset of the functions and users and hardware folks would throw a fit if I extended iommu groups to encompass all the related devices rather than take the relatively simple step of virtualizing these accesses and occasionally quirking devices that are extra broken, as seems to be required here. Thanks,
We may want some kind of "strict" vs. "relaxed" model here to differenciate the desktop user wanting to give a function to his/her windows partition and doesn't care about strict isolation vs. the cloud data center.
Cheers,
Ben.
Re: [PATCHv2 3/4] pci: Determine actual VPD size on first access
Quoted 4 lines · Benjamin Herrenschmidt
We may want some kind of "strict" vs. "relaxed" model here to differenciate the desktop user wanting to give a function to his/her windows partition and doesn't care about strict isolation vs. the cloud data center.
I don't think desktop users appreciate hangs any more than anyone else, and that is one of the symptoms that can arise here without the vfio coordination.
--
Mark Rustad, Networking Division, Intel Corporation
Re: [PATCHv2 3/4] pci: Determine actual VPD size on first access
Quoted 11 lines · Mark D
Quoted 7 lines
Benjamin Herrenschmidt <[email protected]> wrote:
We may want some kind of "strict" vs. "relaxed" model here to differenciate the desktop user wanting to give a function to his/her windows partition and doesn't care about strict isolation vs. the cloud data center.
I don't think desktop users appreciate hangs any more than anyone else, and that is one of the symptoms that can arise here without the vfio coordination.
And can happen with it as well....
Put it this way, we have a hole the size of a football field and we are spending all that time "plugging" it by putting a 3 foot gate in the middle of it... ugh.
VFIO shouldn't try to get between the device driver and the HW, it doesn't work. It cannot work.
Cheers,
Ben.
Re: [PATCHv2 3/4] pci: Determine actual VPD size on first access
Quoted 5 lines · Benjamin Herrenschmidt
Quoted 3 lines
I don't think desktop users appreciate hangs any more than anyone else, and that is one of the symptoms that can arise here without the vfio coordination.
And can happen with it as well....
Oh and your response was completely besides the point I was trying to make, just some passive aggressive noise, thank you.
The point was that if you want the sort of safety that we are trying to aim for, without additional HW support, you basically have to do the isolation on a granularity no smaller than a bridge/bus (with the notable exception of SR-IOV of course).
Otherwise guest *will* be able to harm each other (or the host) in all sorts of ways if anything because devices will have MMIO backdoors into their own BAR space, or can be made to DMA to a neighbour, etc...
This is the only safe thing to do (and we are enforcing that on POWER with our IOMMU groups).
Now that being said, if you want to keep the ability to assign 2 functions of a device to different guests for your average non-critical desktop user, that's where you may want to consider two models.
Generally speaking, filtering things for "safety" won't work.
Filtering things to work around bugs in existing guests to avoid crashes is a different kettle of fish and could be justified but keep in mind that in most cases a malicious guest will be able to exploit those HW flaws.
Assuming that a device coming back from a guest is functional and not completely broken and can be re-used without a full PERST or power cycle is a wrong assumption. It may or may not work, no amount of "filtering" will fix the fundamental issue. If your HW won't give you access to PERST well ... blame Intel for not specifying a standard way to generate it in the first place :-)
Cheers,
Ben.
Re: [PATCHv2 3/4] pci: Determine actual VPD size on first access
Quoted 3 lines · Benjamin Herrenschmidt
Filtering things to work around bugs in existing guests to avoid crashes is a different kettle of fish and could be justified but keep in mind that in most cases a malicious guest will be able to exploit those HW flaws.
Bugs in existing guests is an interesting case, but I have been focused on getting acceptable behavior from a properly functioning guest, in the face of hardware issues that can only be resolved in a single place.
I agree that a malicious guest can cause all kinds of havoc with directly-assigned devices. Consider a 4-port PHY chip on a shared MDIO bus, for instance. There is really nothing to be done about the potential for mischief with that kind of thing.
The VPD problem that I had been concerned about arises from a bad design in the PCI spec together with implementations that share the registers across functions. The hardware isn't going to change and I really doubt that the spec will either, so we address it the only place we can.
I am certain that we agree that not everything can or should be addressed in vfio. I did not mean to suggest it should try to address everything, but I think it should make it possible for correctly behaving guests to work. I think that is not unreasonable.
Perhaps the VPD range check should really just have been implemented for the sysfs interface, and left the vfio case unchecked. I don't know because I was not involved in that issue. Perhaps someone more intimately involved can comment on that notion.
Quoted 6 lines
Assuming that a device coming back from a guest is functional and not completely broken and can be re-used without a full PERST or power cycle is a wrong assumption. It may or may not work, no amount of "filtering" will fix the fundamental issue. If your HW won't give you access to PERST well ... blame Intel for not specifying a standard way to generate it in the first place :-)
Yeah, I worry about the state that a malicious guest could leave a device in, but I consider direct assignment always risky anyway. I would just like it to at least work in the non-malicious guest cases.
I guess my previous response was really just too terse, I was just focused on unavoidable hangs and data corruption, which even were happening without any guest involvement. For me, guests were just an additional exposure of the same underlying issue.
With hindsight, it is easy to see that a standard reset would now be a pretty useful thing. I am sure that even if it existed, we would now have lots and lots of quirks around it as well! :-)
--
Mark Rustad, Networking Division, Intel Corporation
Re: [PATCHv2 3/4] pci: Determine actual VPD size on first access
Quoted 10 lines · Mark D
Bugs in existing guests is an interesting case, but I have been focused on getting acceptable behavior from a properly functioning guest, in the face of hardware issues that can only be resolved in a single place.
I agree that a malicious guest can cause all kinds of havoc with directly-assigned devices. Consider a 4-port PHY chip on a shared MDIO bus, for instance. There is really nothing to be done about the potential for mischief with that kind of thing.
Quoted 4 lines
The VPD problem that I had been concerned about arises from a bad design in the PCI spec together with implementations that share the registers across functions. The hardware isn't going to change and I really doubt that the spec will either, so we address it the only place we can.
Right but as I mentioned, there are plenty of holes when it comes to having multi function devices assigned to different guests, this is just one of them.
Now, that being said, "working around" the bug to make the "non fully secure" case work (in my example case the "desktop user") is probably an ok workaround as long as we fully agree that this is all it is, it by no means provide actual isolation or security.
Quoted 4 lines
Quoted 1 line
Quoted 1 line
rtain that we agree that not everything can or should be addressed
in vfio. I did not mean to suggest it should try to address everything, but I think it should make it possible for correctly behaving guests to work. I think that is not unreasonable.
Again as long as there is no expectation of security here, such as a data center giving PCI access to some devices.
Quoted 4 lines
Quoted 1 line
Perhaps the VPD range check should really just have been implemented for
the sysfs interface, and left the vfio case unchecked. I don't know because I was not involved in that issue. Perhaps someone more intimately involved can comment on that notion.
That would have been my preferred approach... I think VFIO tries to do too much which complicates things, causes other bugs, without briging actual safety. I don't think it should stand in between a guest driver and its device unless absolutely necessary to provide the functionality due to broken HW or design, but with the full understanding that doing so remains unsafe from an isolation standpoint.
Quoted 10 lines
Quoted 6 lines
Quoted 1 line
Assuming that a device coming back from a guest is functional and not
completely broken and can be re-used without a full PERST or power cycle is a wrong assumption. It may or may not work, no amount of "filtering" will fix the fundamental issue. If your HW won't give you access to PERST well ... blame Intel for not specifying a standard way to generate it in the first place :-)
Yeah, I worry about the state that a malicious guest could leave a device in, but I consider direct assignment always risky anyway. I would just like it to at least work in the non-malicious guest cases.
Right. Only SR-IOV which is somewhat designed for assignment is reasonably safe in the general case.
On server POWER boxes, we have isolation at the bus level with usual per-slot PERST control so we are in a much better situation but we also for all the above reasons, only allow a slot granularity for pass-through.
Quoted 8 lines
Quoted 1 line
I guess my previous response was really just too terse, I was just focused
on unavoidable hangs and data corruption, which even were happening without any guest involvement. For me, guests were just an additional exposure of the same underlying issue.
With hindsight, it is easy to see that a standard reset would now be a pretty useful thing. I am sure that even if it existed, we would now have lots and lots of quirks around it as well! :-)
Hehe yes, well, HW for you ...
Cheers,
Ben.
Quoted 2 lines
Quoted 1 line
--
Mark Rustad, Networking Division, Intel Corporation
Re: [PATCHv2 3/4] pci: Determine actual VPD size on first access
In reply to Alexander DuyckQuoted 67 lines · Alexander Duyck
Quoted 16 lines · Benjamin Herrenschmidt
Quoted 4 lines · Alexander Duyck
The problem is if we don't do this it becomes possible for a guest to essentially cripple a device on the host by just accessing VPD regions that aren't actually viable on many devices.
And ? We already can cripple the device in so many different ways simpy because we have pretty much full BAR access to it...
Quoted 3 lines
We are much better off
in terms of security and stability if we restrict access to what should be accessible.Bollox. I've heard that argument over and over again, it never stood and still doesn't.
Quoted 6 lines
We have full BAR access for god sake. We can already destroy the device in many cases (think: reflashing microcode, internal debug bus access with a route to the config space, voltage/freq control ....).
We aren't protecting anything more here, we are just adding layers of bloat, complication and bugs.
To some extent I can agree with you. I don't know if we should be restricting the VFIO based interface the same way we restrict systemd from accessing this region. In the case of VFIO maybe we need to look at a different approach for accessing this. Perhaps we need a privileged version of the VPD accessors that could be used by things like VFIO and the cxgb3 driver since they are assumed to be a bit smarter than those interfaces that were just trying to slurp up something like 4K of VPD data.
Quoted 8 lines
Quoted 3 lines
In this case what has happened is that the
vendor threw in an extra out-of-spec block and just expected it to work.Like vendors do all the time in all sort of places
I still completely fail to see the point in acting as a filtering middle man.
The problem is we are having to do some filtering because things like systemd were using dumb accessors that were trying to suck down 4K of VPD data instead of trying to parse through and read it a field at a time.
Quoted 12 lines
Quoted 8 lines
In order to work around it we just need to add a small function to
drivers/pci/quirks.cthat would update the VPD size reported so that it matches what the hardware is actually providing instead of what we can determine based on the VPD layout.Really working around something like this is not much different than what we would have to do if the vendor had stuffed the data in some reserved section of their PCI configuration space.
It is, in both cases we shouldn't have VFIO or the host involved. We should just let the guest config space accesses go through.
Quoted 6 lines
Quoted 3 lines
We end up needing
to add special quirks any time a vendor goes out-of-spec for some one-off configuration interface that only they are ever going to use.Cheers,
Ben.
Quoted 6 lines
If you have a suggestion on how to resolve this patches are always welcome. Otherwise I think the simpler approach to fixing this without re-introducing the existing bugs is to just add the quirk. I will try to get to it sometime this weekend if nobody else does. It should be pretty straight foward, but I just don't have the time to pull up a kernel and generate a patch right now.
How exactly is mine - https://lkml.org/lkml/2016/8/11/200 - bad (except missing rb/ab from Chelsio folks)? Thanks.
Signature · 1 line
Alexey
Re: [PATCHv2 3/4] pci: Determine actual VPD size on first access
In reply to Alexander DuyckQuoted 56 lines · Alexander Duyck
Quoted 14 lines · Alexey Kardashevskiy
Quoted 11 lines · Bjorn Helgaas
Quoted 10 lines · Hannes Reinecke
PCI-2.2 VPD entries have a maximum size of 32k, but might actually be smaller than that. To figure out the actual size one has to read the VPD area until the 'end marker' is reached.
Trying to read VPD data beyond that marker results in 'interesting' effects, from simple read errors to crashing the card. And to make matters worse not every PCI card implements this properly, leaving us with no 'end' marker or even completely invalid data. This path tries to determine the size of the VPD data. If no valid data can be read an I/O error will be returned when reading the sysfs attribute.Quoted 6 lines
I have a problem with this particular feature as today VFIO uses this
pci_vpd_xxxxAPI to virtualize access to VPD and the existing code assumes there is just one VPD block with0x2start and0xfend. However I have at least one device where this is not true - "10 Gigabit Ethernet-SR PCI Express Adapter" - it has 2 blocks (made a script to read/parse it as /sys/bus/pci/devices/0001\:03\:00.0/vpd shows it wrong):The PCI spec is what essentially assumes that there is only one block. If I am not mistaken in the case of this device the second block here actually contains device configuration data, not actual VPD data. The issue here is that the second block is being accessed as VPD when it isn't.
Quoted 8 lines
#0000 Large item 42 bytes; name
0x2Identifier String #002d Large item 74 bytes; name0x10
#007a Small item 1 bytes; name0xfEnd Tag
---
#0c00 Large item 16 bytes; name0x2Identifier String #0c13 Large item 234 bytes; name0x10
#0d00 Large item 252 bytes; name0x11
#0dff Small item 0 bytes; name0xfEnd TagThe second block here is driver proprietary setup bits.
Quoted 6 lines
The cxgb3 driver is reading the second bit starting from
0xc00but since the size is wrongly detected as0x7c, VFIO blocks access beyond it and the guest driver fails to probe.I also cannot find a clause in the PCI 3.0 spec saying that there must be just a single block, is it there?
The problem is we need to be able to parse it. The spec defines a series of tags that can be used starting at offset 0. That is how we are supposed to get around through the VPD data. The problem is we can't have more than one end tag and what appears to be happening here is that we are defining a second block of data which uses the same formatting as VPD but is not VPD.
Quoted 2 lines
What would the correct fix be? Scanning all 32k of VPD is not an option I suppose as this is what this patch is trying to avoid. Thanks.
Quoted 11 lines
I adding the current cxgb3 maintainer and netdev list to the Cc. This is something that can probably be addressed via a PCI quirk as what needs to happen is that we need to extend the VPD in the case of this part in order to include this second block. As long as we can read the VPD data all the way out to
0xdffodds are we could probably just have the size arbitrarily increased to0xe00via the quirk and then you would be able to access all of the VPD for the device. We already have code making other modifications todrivers/pci/quirks.cfor several Broadcom devices and probably just need something similar to allow extended access in the case of these devices.
Yes, that's what I think, too.
The Broadcom quirk should work here, too.
(Didn't we do that already?)
Cheers,
Hannes
Signature · 5 lines
Dr. Hannes Reinecke Teamlead Storage & Networking [email protected] +49 911 74053 688 SUSE LINUX GmbH, Maxfeldstr. 5, 90409 Nürnberg GF: F. Imendörffer, J. Smithard, J. Guild, D. Upmanyu, G. Norton HRB 21284 (AG Nürnberg)
RFC PATCH 1/1 PCI: Enable access to custom VPD for Chelsio devices (cxgb3)
There is at least one Chelsio 10Gb card which uses VPD area to store some custom blocks (example below). However pci_vpd_size() returns the length of the first block only assuming that there can be only one VPD "End Tag" and VFIO blocks access beyond that offset (since 4e1a63555) which leads to the situation when the guest "cxgb3" driver fails to probe the device. The host system does not have this problem as the drives accesses the config space directly without pci_read_vpd()/...
This adds a quirk to override the VPD size to a bigger value.
This is the controller:
Ethernet controller [0200]: Chelsio Communications Inc T310 10GbE Single Port Adapter [1425:0030]
This is its VPD:
#0000 Large item 42 bytes; name 0x2 Identifier String
b'10 Gigabit Ethernet-SR PCI Express Adapter'
#002d Large item 74 bytes; name 0x10
#00 [EC] len=7: b'D76809 ' #0a [FN] len=7: b'46K7897' #14 [PN] len=7: b'46K7897' #1e [MN] len=4: b'1037' #25 [FC] len=4: b'5769' #2c [SN] len=12: b'YL102035603V' #3b [NA] len=12: b'00145E992ED1' #007a Small item 1 bytes; name 0xf End Tag --- #0c00 Large item 16 bytes; name 0x2 Identifier String b'S310E-SR-X ' #0c13 Large item 234 bytes; name 0x10 #00 [PN] len=16: b'TBD ' #13 [EC] len=16: b'110107730D2 ' #26 [SN] len=16: b'97YL102035603V ' #39 [NA] len=12: b'00145E992ED1' #48 [V0] len=6: b'175000' #51 [V1] len=6: b'266666' #5a [V2] len=6: b'266666' #63 [V3] len=6: b'2000 ' #6c [V4] len=2: b'1 ' #71 [V5] len=6: b'c2 ' #7a [V6] len=6: b'0 ' #83 [V7] len=2: b'1 ' #88 [V8] len=2: b'0 ' #8d [V9] len=2: b'0 ' #92 [VA] len=2: b'0 ' #97 [RV] len=80: b's\x00\x00\x00\x00\x00\x00\x00\x00\x00\x00\x00\x00\x00\x00\x00'... #0d00 Large item 252 bytes; name 0x11 #00 [VC] len=16: b'122310_1222 dp ' #13 [VD] len=16: b'610-0001-00 H1\x00\x00' #26 [VE] len=16: b'122310_1353 fp ' #39 [VF] len=16: b'610-0001-00 H1\x00\x00' #4c [RW] len=173: b'\x00\x00\x00\x00\x00\x00\x00\x00\x00\x00\x00\x00\x00\x00\x00\x00'...
#0dff Small item 0 bytes; name 0xf End Tag
--- drivers/pci/quirks.c | 12 ++++++++++++ 1 file changed, 12 insertions(+)
drivers/pci/quirks.c +12 -0
@@ -3241,6 +3241,18 @@ DECLARE_PCI_FIXUP_FINAL(PCI_VENDOR_ID_INTEL, PCI_DEVICE_ID_INTEL_CACTUS_RIDGE_4CDECLARE_PCI_FIXUP_FINAL (PCI_VENDOR_ID_INTEL ,PCI_DEVICE_ID_INTEL_PORT_RIDGE , quirk_thunderbolt_hotplug_msi); +static void quirk_chelsio_extend_vpd (struct pci_dev *dev) +{ +if (!dev->vpd || !dev->vpd->ops || !dev->vpd->ops->set_size) +return ; + + dev->vpd->ops->set_size(dev, max_t(unsigned int, dev->vpd->len, 0xe00)); +} + +DECLARE_PCI_FIXUP_FINAL (PCI_VENDOR_ID_CHELSIO , +PCI_ANY_ID , + quirk_chelsio_extend_vpd); +#ifdef CONFIG_ACPI /* * Apple: Shutdown Cactus Ridge Thunderbolt controller.
Signature · 1 line
2.5.0.rc3
Re: [RFC PATCH kernel] PCI: Enable access to custom VPD for Chelsio devices (cxgb3)
Hi Alexey,
Quoted 68 lines · Alexey Kardashevskiy
There is at least one Chelsio 10Gb card which uses VPD area to store some custom blocks (example below). However
pci_vpd_size()returns the length of the first block only assuming that there can be only one VPD "End Tag" and VFIO blocks access beyond that offset (since4e1a63555) which leads to the situation when the guest "cxgb3" driver fails to probe the device. The host system does not have this problem as the drives accesses the config space directly without pci_read_vpd()/...This adds a quirk to override the VPD size to a bigger value.
This is the controller:
Ethernet controller [0200]: Chelsio Communications Inc T310 10GbE Single Port Adapter [1425:0030]This is its VPD:
#0000 Large item 42 bytes; name0x2Identifier String
b'10 Gigabit Ethernet-SR PCI Express Adapter'
#002d Large item 74 bytes; name0x10#00 [EC] len=7: b'D76809 ' #0a [FN] len=7: b'46K7897' #14 [PN] len=7: b'46K7897' #1e [MN] len=4: b'1037' #25 [FC] len=4: b'5769' #2c [SN] len=12: b'YL102035603V' #3b [NA] len=12: b'00145E992ED1' #007a Small item 1 bytes; name 0xf End Tag --- #0c00 Large item 16 bytes; name 0x2 Identifier String b'S310E-SR-X ' #0c13 Large item 234 bytes; name 0x10 #00 [PN] len=16: b'TBD ' #13 [EC] len=16: b'110107730D2 ' #26 [SN] len=16: b'97YL102035603V ' #39 [NA] len=12: b'00145E992ED1' #48 [V0] len=6: b'175000' #51 [V1] len=6: b'266666' #5a [V2] len=6: b'266666' #63 [V3] len=6: b'2000 ' #6c [V4] len=2: b'1 ' #71 [V5] len=6: b'c2 ' #7a [V6] len=6: b'0 ' #83 [V7] len=2: b'1 ' #88 [V8] len=2: b'0 ' #8d [V9] len=2: b'0 ' #92 [VA] len=2: b'0 ' #97 [RV] len=80: b's\x00\x00\x00\x00\x00\x00\x00\x00\x00\x00\x00\x00\x00\x00\x00'... #0d00 Large item 252 bytes; name 0x11 #00 [VC] len=16: b'122310_1222 dp ' #13 [VD] len=16: b'610-0001-00 H1\x00\x00' #26 [VE] len=16: b'122310_1353 fp ' #39 [VF] len=16: b'610-0001-00 H1\x00\x00' #4c [RW] len=173: b'\x00\x00\x00\x00\x00\x00\x00\x00\x00\x00\x00\x00\x00\x00\x00\x00'...#0dff Small item 0 bytes; name
0xfEnd TagSigned-off-by Alexey Kardashevskiy <[email protected]>--- drivers/pci/quirks.c | 12 ++++++++++++ 1 file changed, 12 insertions(+)drivers/pci/quirks.c +1
-0@@ -3241,6 +3241,18 @@ DECLARE_PCI_FIXUP_FINAL(PCI_VENDOR_ID_INTEL, PCI_DEVICE_ID_INTEL_CACTUS_RIDGE_4CDECLARE_PCI_FIXUP_FINAL (PCI_VENDOR_ID_INTEL ,PCI_DEVICE_ID_INTEL_PORT_RIDGE , quirk_thunderbolt_hotplug_msi); +static void quirk_chelsio_extend_vpd (struct pci_dev *dev)
drivers/pci/quirks.c DECLARE_PCI_FIXUP_FINAL(PCI_VENDOR_ID_INTEL, PCI_DEVICE_ID_INTEL_CACTUS_RIDGE_4C · line 3254
Quoted 10 lines
drivers/pci/quirks.c +10
-0+{ +if (!dev->vpd || !dev->vpd->ops || !dev->vpd->ops->set_size) +return ; + + dev->vpd->ops->set_size(dev, max_t(unsigned int, dev->vpd->len, 0xe00)); +} + +DECLARE_PCI_FIXUP_FINAL (PCI_VENDOR_ID_CHELSIO , +PCI_ANY_ID , + quirk_chelsio_extend_vpd);
Do you really want this for *all* Chelsio devices? If you only need it for certain devices, the quirk could probably go in the driver.
Can you use pci_set_vpd_size() instead? There's already a use of that in cxgb4.
Quoted 11 lines
drivers/pci/quirks.c +1
-0+#ifdef CONFIG_ACPI /* * Apple: Shutdown Cactus Ridge Thunderbolt controller. Signature · 6 lines
2.5.0.rc3 -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-pci" in the body of a message to [email protected] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Re: [RFC PATCH kernel] PCI: Enable access to custom VPD for Chelsio devices (cxgb3)
Quoted 70 lines · Bjorn Helgaas
Hi Alexey,
Quoted 67 lines · Alexey Kardashevskiy
There is at least one Chelsio 10Gb card which uses VPD area to store some custom blocks (example below). However
pci_vpd_size()returns the length of the first block only assuming that there can be only one VPD "End Tag" and VFIO blocks access beyond that offset (since4e1a63555) which leads to the situation when the guest "cxgb3" driver fails to probe the device. The host system does not have this problem as the drives accesses the config space directly without pci_read_vpd()/...This adds a quirk to override the VPD size to a bigger value.
This is the controller:
Ethernet controller [0200]: Chelsio Communications Inc T310 10GbE Single Port Adapter [1425:0030]This is its VPD:
#0000 Large item 42 bytes; name0x2Identifier String
b'10 Gigabit Ethernet-SR PCI Express Adapter'
#002d Large item 74 bytes; name0x10#00 [EC] len=7: b'D76809 ' #0a [FN] len=7: b'46K7897' #14 [PN] len=7: b'46K7897' #1e [MN] len=4: b'1037' #25 [FC] len=4: b'5769' #2c [SN] len=12: b'YL102035603V' #3b [NA] len=12: b'00145E992ED1' #007a Small item 1 bytes; name 0xf End Tag --- #0c00 Large item 16 bytes; name 0x2 Identifier String b'S310E-SR-X ' #0c13 Large item 234 bytes; name 0x10 #00 [PN] len=16: b'TBD ' #13 [EC] len=16: b'110107730D2 ' #26 [SN] len=16: b'97YL102035603V ' #39 [NA] len=12: b'00145E992ED1' #48 [V0] len=6: b'175000' #51 [V1] len=6: b'266666' #5a [V2] len=6: b'266666' #63 [V3] len=6: b'2000 ' #6c [V4] len=2: b'1 ' #71 [V5] len=6: b'c2 ' #7a [V6] len=6: b'0 ' #83 [V7] len=2: b'1 ' #88 [V8] len=2: b'0 ' #8d [V9] len=2: b'0 ' #92 [VA] len=2: b'0 ' #97 [RV] len=80: b's\x00\x00\x00\x00\x00\x00\x00\x00\x00\x00\x00\x00\x00\x00\x00'... #0d00 Large item 252 bytes; name 0x11 #00 [VC] len=16: b'122310_1222 dp ' #13 [VD] len=16: b'610-0001-00 H1\x00\x00' #26 [VE] len=16: b'122310_1353 fp ' #39 [VF] len=16: b'610-0001-00 H1\x00\x00' #4c [RW] len=173: b'\x00\x00\x00\x00\x00\x00\x00\x00\x00\x00\x00\x00\x00\x00\x00\x00'...#0dff Small item 0 bytes; name
0xfEnd TagSigned-off-by Alexey Kardashevskiy <[email protected]>--- drivers/pci/quirks.c | 12 ++++++++++++ 1 file changed, 12 insertions(+)drivers/pci/quirks.c +0
-0@@ -3241,6 +3241,18 @@ DECLARE_PCI_FIXUP_FINAL(PCI_VENDOR_ID_INTEL, PCI_DEVICE_ID_INTEL_CACTUS_RIDGE_4CDECLARE_PCI_FIXUP_FINAL (PCI_VENDOR_ID_INTEL ,PCI_DEVICE_ID_INTEL_PORT_RIDGE , quirk_thunderbolt_hotplug_msi);
Quoted 8 lines
drivers/pci/quirks.c DECLARE_PCI_FIXUP_FINAL(PCI_VENDOR_ID_INTEL, PCI_DEVICE_ID_INTEL_CACTUS_RIDGE_4C · line 3251
Quoted 8 lines
drivers/pci/quirks.c +8
-0+static void quirk_chelsio_extend_vpd (struct pci_dev *dev) +{ +if (!dev->vpd || !dev->vpd->ops || !dev->vpd->ops->set_size) +return ; + + dev->vpd->ops->set_size(dev, max_t(unsigned int, dev->vpd->len, 0xe00)); +} +
So one thing you might want to look at doing is actually validating there is something there before increasing the size. If you look at the get_vpd_params function from the cxgb3 driver you will see what they do is verify the first tag located at 0xC00 is 0x82 before they do any further reads. You might do something similar just to verify there is something there before you open it up to access by anyone.
One option would be to modify pci_vpd_size so that you can use it outside of access.c and can pass it an offset. Then you could update your quirk so that you call pci_vpd_size and pass it the offset of 0xC00. It should then be able to walk from that starting point and reach the end of the list. If you do then pci_vpd_size will return the total size, else it returns 0. So if size comes back as a non-zero value then you could pass that into pci_set_vpd_size, otherwise we can assume the starting offset is 0 and let the existing code run its course.
Quoted 10 lines
drivers/pci/quirks.c DECLARE_PCI_FIXUP_FINAL(PCI_VENDOR_ID_INTEL, PCI_DEVICE_ID_INTEL_CACTUS_RIDGE_4C · line 3254
Quoted 3 lines
drivers/pci/quirks.c +3
-0+DECLARE_PCI_FIXUP_FINAL (PCI_VENDOR_ID_CHELSIO , +PCI_ANY_ID , + quirk_chelsio_extend_vpd);Do you really want this for *all* Chelsio devices? If you only need it for certain devices, the quirk could probably go in the driver.
Can you use
pci_set_vpd_size()instead? There's already a use of that in cxgb4.
I would assume this quirk needs to support the same device IDs as supported by the cxgb3 driver. If so you might just clone the ID list from cxgb3_pci_tbl for this quirk.
Also from the looks of it the cxgb3 driver probably needs to be updated to use the VPD accessor functions instead of just open coding it themselves. Otherwise we run the risk of the driver having issues if it attempts to access the EEPROM at the same time as other applications attempting to access the VPD for the device.
Re: [RFC PATCH kernel] PCI: Enable access to custom VPD for Chelsio devices (cxgb3)
Quoted 87 lines · Alexander Duyck
Quoted 70 lines · Bjorn Helgaas
Hi Alexey,
Quoted 67 lines · Alexey Kardashevskiy
There is at least one Chelsio 10Gb card which uses VPD area to store some custom blocks (example below). However
pci_vpd_size()returns the length of the first block only assuming that there can be only one VPD "End Tag" and VFIO blocks access beyond that offset (since4e1a63555) which leads to the situation when the guest "cxgb3" driver fails to probe the device. The host system does not have this problem as the drives accesses the config space directly without pci_read_vpd()/...This adds a quirk to override the VPD size to a bigger value.
This is the controller:
Ethernet controller [0200]: Chelsio Communications Inc T310 10GbE Single Port Adapter [1425:0030]This is its VPD:
#0000 Large item 42 bytes; name0x2Identifier String
b'10 Gigabit Ethernet-SR PCI Express Adapter'
#002d Large item 74 bytes; name0x10#00 [EC] len=7: b'D76809 ' #0a [FN] len=7: b'46K7897' #14 [PN] len=7: b'46K7897' #1e [MN] len=4: b'1037' #25 [FC] len=4: b'5769' #2c [SN] len=12: b'YL102035603V' #3b [NA] len=12: b'00145E992ED1' #007a Small item 1 bytes; name 0xf End Tag --- #0c00 Large item 16 bytes; name 0x2 Identifier String b'S310E-SR-X ' #0c13 Large item 234 bytes; name 0x10 #00 [PN] len=16: b'TBD ' #13 [EC] len=16: b'110107730D2 ' #26 [SN] len=16: b'97YL102035603V ' #39 [NA] len=12: b'00145E992ED1' #48 [V0] len=6: b'175000' #51 [V1] len=6: b'266666' #5a [V2] len=6: b'266666' #63 [V3] len=6: b'2000 ' #6c [V4] len=2: b'1 ' #71 [V5] len=6: b'c2 ' #7a [V6] len=6: b'0 ' #83 [V7] len=2: b'1 ' #88 [V8] len=2: b'0 ' #8d [V9] len=2: b'0 ' #92 [VA] len=2: b'0 ' #97 [RV] len=80: b's\x00\x00\x00\x00\x00\x00\x00\x00\x00\x00\x00\x00\x00\x00\x00'... #0d00 Large item 252 bytes; name 0x11 #00 [VC] len=16: b'122310_1222 dp ' #13 [VD] len=16: b'610-0001-00 H1\x00\x00' #26 [VE] len=16: b'122310_1353 fp ' #39 [VF] len=16: b'610-0001-00 H1\x00\x00' #4c [RW] len=173: b'\x00\x00\x00\x00\x00\x00\x00\x00\x00\x00\x00\x00\x00\x00\x00\x00'...#0dff Small item 0 bytes; name
0xfEnd TagSigned-off-by Alexey Kardashevskiy <[email protected]>--- drivers/pci/quirks.c | 12 ++++++++++++ 1 file changed, 12 insertions(+)drivers/pci/quirks.c +0
-0@@ -3241,6 +3241,18 @@ DECLARE_PCI_FIXUP_FINAL(PCI_VENDOR_ID_INTEL, PCI_DEVICE_ID_INTEL_CACTUS_RIDGE_4CDECLARE_PCI_FIXUP_FINAL (PCI_VENDOR_ID_INTEL ,PCI_DEVICE_ID_INTEL_PORT_RIDGE , quirk_thunderbolt_hotplug_msi);Quoted 8 lines
drivers/pci/quirks.c DECLARE_PCI_FIXUP_FINAL(PCI_VENDOR_ID_INTEL, PCI_DEVICE_ID_INTEL_CACTUS_RIDGE_4C · line 3251
Quoted 8 lines
drivers/pci/quirks.c +8
-0+static void quirk_chelsio_extend_vpd (struct pci_dev *dev) +{ +if (!dev->vpd || !dev->vpd->ops || !dev->vpd->ops->set_size) +return ; + + dev->vpd->ops->set_size(dev, max_t(unsigned int, dev->vpd->len, 0xe00)); +} +So one thing you might want to look at doing is actually validating there is something there before increasing the size. If you look at the
get_vpd_paramsfunction from the cxgb3 driver you will see what they do is verify the first tag located at0xC00is0x82before they do any further reads. You might do something similar just to verify there is something there before you open it up to access by anyone.
Quoted 9 lines
One option would be to modify
pci_vpd_sizeso that you can use it outside ofaccess.cand can pass it an offset. Then you could update your quirk so that you callpci_vpd_sizeand pass it the offset of0xC00. It should then be able to walk from that starting point and reach the end of the list. If you do thenpci_vpd_sizewill return the total size, else it returns 0. So if size comes back as a non-zero value then you could pass that intopci_set_vpd_size, otherwise we can assume the starting offset is 0 and let the existing code run its course.
I could do this but I can predict endless argument whether a generic pci_vpd_size() should scan for something which looks like VPD but it is not, etc. I'd read at 0xc00, if it is 0x82, then pci_set_vpd_size(0xe00) and that's it.
Quoted 6 lines
Quoted 6 lines
drivers/pci/quirks.c DECLARE_PCI_FIXUP_FINAL(PCI_VENDOR_ID_INTEL, PCI_DEVICE_ID_INTEL_CACTUS_RIDGE_4C · line 3254
Quoted 4 lines
drivers/pci/quirks.c +3
-0+DECLARE_PCI_FIXUP_FINAL (PCI_VENDOR_ID_CHELSIO , +PCI_ANY_ID , + quirk_chelsio_extend_vpd);Do you really want this for *all* Chelsio devices?
Well, no. When I did this, I just wanted opinions :) I'll have a list here in next revision.
Quoted 1 line
If you only need it for certain devices, the quirk could probably go in the driver.
It cannot, the cxgb3 driver is not running on the host, vfio-pci controls it .
Quoted 10 lines
Quoted 5 lines
Can you use
pci_set_vpd_size()instead? There's already a use of that in cxgb4.I would assume this quirk needs to support the same device IDs as supported by the cxgb3 driver. If so you might just clone the ID list from
cxgb3_pci_tblfor this quirk.
Quoted 5 lines
Also from the looks of it the cxgb3 driver probably needs to be updated to use the VPD accessor functions instead of just open coding it themselves. Otherwise we run the risk of the driver having issues if it attempts to access the EEPROM at the same time as other applications attempting to access the VPD for the device.
In this particular case cxgb3 driver is not running, vfio-pci controls the device on the host side and does all the filtering so I have to add a quirk to drivers/pci/quirks.c with all 13 PCI IDs of cxgb3 hardware OOOOOR implement quirks in vfio-pci (it has one already but I seriously doubt we should extend it).
Fixing cxgb3 in the guest won't make any difference.
So where should I put the quirks? Thanks.
Signature · 1 line
Alexey
Re: [PATCHv2 3/4] pci: Determine actual VPD size on first access
In reply to Alexey KardashevskiyQuoted 10 lines · Alexey Kardashevskiy
The cxgb3 driver is reading the second bit starting from
0xc00but since the size is wrongly detected as0x7c, VFIO blocks access beyond it and the guest driver fails to probe.I also cannot find a clause in the PCI 3.0 spec saying that there must be just a single block, is it there?
What would the correct fix be? Scanning all 32k of VPD is not an option I suppose as this is what this patch is trying to avoid. Thanks.
Additionally, Hannes, Alex, I argue that for platforms with proper HW isolation (such as ppc with EEH), we shouldn't have VFIO try to virtualize that stuff.
It's the same problem with the bloody MSIs. Just let the guest config space accesses go straight through. Its drivers knows better what the HW needs and if it crashes the card, too bad for that guest.
That being said, we don't have fine grained per-device PERST control on all systems so there may not be recovery from that but on the other hand, our constant attempts at "filtering" what the guest does to the HW is imho, doomed.
Cheers,
Ben.
PATCH v2 4/4 pci: Blacklist vpd access for buggy devices
In reply to Hannes ReineckeFrom: Babu Moger <[email protected]>
Reading or Writing of PCI VPD data causes system panic. We saw this problem by running "lspci -vvv" in the beginning. However this can be easily reproduced by running
cat /sys/bus/devices/XX../vpd
As even a simple read on any VPD data triggers a system lockup on certain cards this patch implements a PCI quirk to disabling VPD acces altogether by setting the vpd length to '0'.
--- drivers/pci/access.c | 5 ++++- drivers/pci/quirks.c | 41 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ 2 files changed, 45 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
drivers/pci/access.c +4 -1
@@ -396,7 +396,7 @@ static ssize_t pci_vpd_pci22_read(struct pci_dev *dev, loff_t pos, size_t count,if (pos <0 )return -EINVAL ; -if (!vpd->valid) { +if (!vpd->valid && vpd->base.len >0 ) { vpd->valid = true; vpd->base.len =pci_vpd_pci22_size (dev); }
@@ -459,6 +459,9 @@ static ssize_t pci_vpd_pci22_write(struct pci_dev *dev, loff_t pos, size_t countloff_t end = pos + count;int ret =0 ; +if (vpd->base.len ==0 ) +return -EIO ; +if (!vpd->valid)return -EAGAIN ;
drivers/pci/quirks.c +41 -0
47 lines not on this page · raw message
Signature · 1 line
1.8.5.6
PATCH v3 4/4 pci: Blacklist vpd access for buggy devices
Reading or Writing of PCI VPD data causes system panic. We saw this problem by running "lspci -vvv" in the beginning. However this can be easily reproduced by running
cat /sys/bus/devices/XX../vpd
As even a simple read on any VPD data triggers a system lockup on certain cards this patch implements a PCI quirk to disabling VPD acces altogether by setting the vpd length to '0'.
--- drivers/pci/access.c | 5 ++++- drivers/pci/quirks.c | 43 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ 2 files changed, 47 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)
drivers/pci/access.c +4 -1
@@ -396,7 +396,7 @@ static ssize_t pci_vpd_pci22_read(struct pci_dev *dev, loff_t pos, size_t count,if (pos <0 )return -EINVAL ; -if (!vpd->valid) { +if (!vpd->valid && vpd->base.len >0 ) { vpd->valid = true; vpd->base.len =pci_vpd_pci22_size (dev); }
@@ -459,6 +459,9 @@ static ssize_t pci_vpd_pci22_write(struct pci_dev *dev, loff_t pos, size_t countloff_t end = pos + count;int ret =0 ; +if (vpd->base.len ==0 ) +return -EIO ; +if (!vpd->valid)return -EAGAIN ;
drivers/pci/quirks.c +43 -0
49 lines not on this page · raw message
Signature · 1 line
1.7.1
Re: [PATCHv2 4/4] pci: Blacklist vpd access for buggy devices
In reply to Hannes ReineckeThere seem to be several revs of this patch, and it's hard for me to keep track of what's current. If you want to update any patch in the series, please repost the entire series with a new version number.
Quoted 10 lines · Hannes Reinecke
From: Babu Moger <[email protected]>
Reading or Writing of PCI VPD data causes system panic. We saw this problem by running "lspci -vvv" in the beginning. However this can be easily reproduced by running
cat/sys/bus/devices/XX../vpdAs even a simple read on any VPD data triggers a system lockup on certain cards this patch implements a PCI quirk to disabling VPD acces altogether by setting the vpd length
s/acces/access/
s/vpd/VPD/
Quoted 44 lines
to '0'.
Signed-off-by Babu Moger <[email protected]>Signed-off-by Hannes Reinecke <[email protected]>--- drivers/pci/access.c | 5 ++++- drivers/pci/quirks.c | 41 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ 2 files changed, 45 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)drivers/pci/access.c +4
-1@@ -396,7 +396,7 @@ static ssize_t pci_vpd_pci22_read(struct pci_dev *dev, loff_t pos, size_t count,if (pos <0 )return -EINVAL ; -if (!vpd->valid) { +if (!vpd->valid && vpd->base.len >0 ) { vpd->valid = true; vpd->base.len =pci_vpd_pci22_size (dev); }@@ -459,6 +459,9 @@ static ssize_t pci_vpd_pci22_write(struct pci_dev *dev, loff_t pos, size_t countloff_t end = pos + count;int ret =0 ; +if (vpd->base.len ==0 ) +return -EIO ; +if (!vpd->valid)return -EAGAIN ;drivers/pci/quirks.c +4
-0@@ -2123,6 +2123,47 @@ static void quirk_via_cx700_pci_parking_caching(struct pci_dev *dev)DECLARE_PCI_FIXUP_FINAL (PCI_VENDOR_ID_VIA ,0x324e , quirk_via_cx700_pci_parking_caching);/* +* A read/write to sysfs entry ('/sys/bus/pci/devices/<id>/vpd') +* will dump 32k of data. The default length is set as 32768. +* Reading a full 32k will cause an access beyond the VPD end tag. +* The system behaviour at that point is mostly unpredictable.
drivers/pci/quirks.c static void quirk_via_cx700_pci_parking_caching(struct pci_dev *dev) · line 2139
Quoted 10 lines
drivers/pci/quirks.c +10
-0+* Apparently, some vendors have not implemented this VPD headers properly. +* Adding a generic function disable vpd data for these buggy adapters +* Add the DECLARE_PCI_FIXUP_FINAL line below with the specific with +* vendor and device of interest to use this quirk. +*/ +static void quirk_blacklist_vpd (struct pci_dev *dev) +{ +if (dev->vpd) { + dev->vpd->len =0 ; +dev_warn (&dev->dev,"PCI vpd access has been disabled due to firmware bug\n" );
"PCI" is superfluous and "VPD" should be capitalized.
Quoted 37 lines
drivers/pci/quirks.c +27
-0+ } +} + +DECLARE_PCI_FIXUP_FINAL (PCI_VENDOR_ID_LSI_LOGIC ,0x0060 , + quirk_blacklist_vpd); +DECLARE_PCI_FIXUP_FINAL (PCI_VENDOR_ID_LSI_LOGIC ,0x007c , + quirk_blacklist_vpd); +DECLARE_PCI_FIXUP_FINAL (PCI_VENDOR_ID_LSI_LOGIC ,0x0413 , + quirk_blacklist_vpd); +DECLARE_PCI_FIXUP_FINAL (PCI_VENDOR_ID_LSI_LOGIC ,0x0078 , + quirk_blacklist_vpd); +DECLARE_PCI_FIXUP_FINAL (PCI_VENDOR_ID_LSI_LOGIC ,0x0079 , + quirk_blacklist_vpd); +DECLARE_PCI_FIXUP_FINAL (PCI_VENDOR_ID_LSI_LOGIC ,0x0073 , + quirk_blacklist_vpd); +DECLARE_PCI_FIXUP_FINAL (PCI_VENDOR_ID_LSI_LOGIC ,0x0071 , + quirk_blacklist_vpd); +DECLARE_PCI_FIXUP_FINAL (PCI_VENDOR_ID_LSI_LOGIC ,0x005b , + quirk_blacklist_vpd); +DECLARE_PCI_FIXUP_FINAL (PCI_VENDOR_ID_LSI_LOGIC ,0x002f , + quirk_blacklist_vpd); +DECLARE_PCI_FIXUP_FINAL (PCI_VENDOR_ID_LSI_LOGIC ,0x005d , + quirk_blacklist_vpd); +DECLARE_PCI_FIXUP_FINAL (PCI_VENDOR_ID_LSI_LOGIC ,0x005f , + quirk_blacklist_vpd); + +/* * For Broadcom 5706, 5708, 5709 rev. A nics, any read beyond the * VPD end tag will hang the device. This problem was initially * observed when a vpd entry was created in sysfs Signature · 6 lines
1.8.5.6 -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-pci" in the body of a message to [email protected] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Re: [PATCHv2 4/4] pci: Blacklist vpd access for buggy devices
Quoted 3 lines · Bjorn Helgaas
There seem to be several revs of this patch, and it's hard for me to keep track of what's current. If you want to update any patch in the series, please repost the entire series with a new version number.
Here is the latest of patch 4/4.
https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/8084221/
I will wait for Hannes's response before re-posting it. Hannes, If you want me to re-post all the series let me know.
Quoted 110 lines · Hannes Reinecke
Quoted 10 lines
From: Babu Moger <[email protected]>
Reading or Writing of PCI VPD data causes system panic. We saw this problem by running "lspci -vvv" in the beginning. However this can be easily reproduced by running
cat/sys/bus/devices/XX../vpdAs even a simple read on any VPD data triggers a system lockup on certain cards this patch implements a PCI quirk to disabling VPD acces altogether by setting the vpd length
s/acces/access/
s/vpd/VPD/Quoted 44 lines
to '0'.
Signed-off-by Babu Moger <[email protected]>Signed-off-by Hannes Reinecke <[email protected]>--- drivers/pci/access.c | 5 ++++- drivers/pci/quirks.c | 41 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ 2 files changed, 45 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)drivers/pci/access.c +4
-1@@ -396,7 +396,7 @@ static ssize_t pci_vpd_pci22_read(struct pci_dev *dev, loff_t pos, size_t count,if (pos <0 )return -EINVAL ; -if (!vpd->valid) { +if (!vpd->valid && vpd->base.len >0 ) { vpd->valid = true; vpd->base.len =pci_vpd_pci22_size (dev); }@@ -459,6 +459,9 @@ static ssize_t pci_vpd_pci22_write(struct pci_dev *dev, loff_t pos, size_t countloff_t end = pos + count;int ret =0 ; +if (vpd->base.len ==0 ) +return -EIO ; +if (!vpd->valid)return -EAGAIN ;drivers/pci/quirks.c +4
-0@@ -2123,6 +2123,47 @@ static void quirk_via_cx700_pci_parking_caching(struct pci_dev *dev)DECLARE_PCI_FIXUP_FINAL (PCI_VENDOR_ID_VIA ,0x324e , quirk_via_cx700_pci_parking_caching);/* +* A read/write to sysfs entry ('/sys/bus/pci/devices/<id>/vpd') +* will dump 32k of data. The default length is set as 32768. +* Reading a full 32k will cause an access beyond the VPD end tag. +* The system behaviour at that point is mostly unpredictable. drivers/pci/quirks.c static void quirk_via_cx700_pci_parking_caching(struct pci_dev *dev) · line 2139
Quoted 10 lines
drivers/pci/quirks.c +10
-0+* Apparently, some vendors have not implemented this VPD headers properly. +* Adding a generic function disable vpd data for these buggy adapters +* Add the DECLARE_PCI_FIXUP_FINAL line below with the specific with +* vendor and device of interest to use this quirk. +*/ +static void quirk_blacklist_vpd (struct pci_dev *dev) +{ +if (dev->vpd) { + dev->vpd->len =0 ; +dev_warn (&dev->dev,"PCI vpd access has been disabled due to firmware bug\n" );"PCI" is superfluous and "VPD" should be capitalized.
Quoted 37 lines
drivers/pci/quirks.c +27
-0+ } +} + +DECLARE_PCI_FIXUP_FINAL (PCI_VENDOR_ID_LSI_LOGIC ,0x0060 , + quirk_blacklist_vpd); +DECLARE_PCI_FIXUP_FINAL (PCI_VENDOR_ID_LSI_LOGIC ,0x007c , + quirk_blacklist_vpd); +DECLARE_PCI_FIXUP_FINAL (PCI_VENDOR_ID_LSI_LOGIC ,0x0413 , + quirk_blacklist_vpd); +DECLARE_PCI_FIXUP_FINAL (PCI_VENDOR_ID_LSI_LOGIC ,0x0078 , + quirk_blacklist_vpd); +DECLARE_PCI_FIXUP_FINAL (PCI_VENDOR_ID_LSI_LOGIC ,0x0079 , + quirk_blacklist_vpd); +DECLARE_PCI_FIXUP_FINAL (PCI_VENDOR_ID_LSI_LOGIC ,0x0073 , + quirk_blacklist_vpd); +DECLARE_PCI_FIXUP_FINAL (PCI_VENDOR_ID_LSI_LOGIC ,0x0071 , + quirk_blacklist_vpd); +DECLARE_PCI_FIXUP_FINAL (PCI_VENDOR_ID_LSI_LOGIC ,0x005b , + quirk_blacklist_vpd); +DECLARE_PCI_FIXUP_FINAL (PCI_VENDOR_ID_LSI_LOGIC ,0x002f , + quirk_blacklist_vpd); +DECLARE_PCI_FIXUP_FINAL (PCI_VENDOR_ID_LSI_LOGIC ,0x005d , + quirk_blacklist_vpd); +DECLARE_PCI_FIXUP_FINAL (PCI_VENDOR_ID_LSI_LOGIC ,0x005f , + quirk_blacklist_vpd); + +/* * For Broadcom 5706, 5708, 5709 rev. A nics, any read beyond the * VPD end tag will hang the device. This problem was initially * observed when a vpd entry was created in sysfs Signature · 6 lines
1.8.5.6 -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-pci" in the body of a message to [email protected] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
For the series. Tested with AE311 PCI-Express 4Gb Fibre Channel HBA. Truncation of the vpd data returned works (154 bytes) and lspci -vvv prints out the VPD tags the same way with and without the changes. This card did not require any quirks it was capable of returning 32k of data (although it repeated every 4k).
---
Shane, Thank You very much..
Quoted 8 lines · Shane M
For the series. Tested with AE311 PCI-Express 4Gb Fibre Channel HBA. Truncation of the vpd data returned works (154 bytes) and lspci -vvv prints out the VPD tags the same way with and without the changes. This card did not require any quirks it was capable of returning 32k of data (although it repeated every 4k).
---Tested-by Shane Seymour <[email protected]>
Quoted 11 lines · Babu Moger
Shane, Thank You very much..
Quoted 8 lines · Shane M
For the series. Tested with AE311 PCI-Express 4Gb Fibre Channel HBA. Truncation of the vpd data returned works (154 bytes) and lspci -vvv prints out the VPD tags the same way with and without the changes. This card did not require any quirks it was capable of returning 32k of data (although it repeated every 4k).
---Tested-by Shane Seymour <[email protected]>
So, Alexander, are you happy with this series? It looks as if the technical issues are resolved now ...
Cheers,
Hannes
Signature · 5 lines
Dr. Hannes Reinecke Teamlead Storage & Networking [email protected] +49 911 74053 688 SUSE LINUX GmbH, Maxfeldstr. 5, 90409 Nürnberg GF: F. Imendörffer, J. Smithard, J. Guild, D. Upmanyu, G. Norton HRB 21284 (AG Nürnberg)
Hi,
Quoted 22 lines · Hannes Reinecke
Hi all,
the current PCI VPD page access assumes that the entire possible VPD data is readable. However, the spec only guarantees a VPD data up to the 'end' marker, with everything beyond that being undefined. This causes a system lockup on certain devices.
With this patch we always set the VPD sysfs attribute size to '0', and calculate the available VPD size on the first access.
If no valid data can be read an I/O error is returned.I've also included the patch from Babu to blacklists devices which are known to lockup when accessing the VPD data.
Babu Moger (1):
pci: Blacklist vpd access for buggy devicesHannes Reinecke (3):
pci: Update VPD definitions
pci: allow access to VPD attributes with size '0'
pci: Determine actual VPD size on first access
Quoted 6 lines
drivers/pci/access.c | 79 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- drivers/pci/pci-sysfs.c | 22 ++++++++------ drivers/pci/quirks.c | 41 +++++++++++++++++++++++++ include/linux/pci.h | 27 +++++++++++++++-- 4 files changed, 157 insertions(+), 12 deletions(-)
Resending the patch 4/4. Added Atheros controller(0x1969:0x1026) in blacklist.
Jordan confirmed the Vendor and Device id(0x1969:0x1026). Here is the device.
09:00.0 Ethernet controller: Atheros Communications AR8121/AR8113/AR8114 Gigabit or Fast Ethernet (rev b0)
PATCH v4 4/4 pci: Blacklist vpd access for buggy devices
In reply to Hannes ReineckeReading or Writing of PCI VPD data causes system panic. We saw this problem by running "lspci -vvv" in the beginning. However this can be easily reproduced by running
cat /sys/bus/devices/XX../vpd
As even a simple read on any VPD data triggers a system lockup on certain cards this patch implements a PCI quirk to disabling VPD acces altogether by setting the vpd length to '0'.
Added all the PCI_VENDOR_ID_ATTANSIC varients.
--- drivers/pci/access.c | 5 ++++- drivers/pci/quirks.c | 43 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ 2 files changed, 47 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)
drivers/pci/access.c +4 -1
@@ -396,7 +396,7 @@ static ssize_t pci_vpd_pci22_read(struct pci_dev *dev, loff_t pos, size_t count,if (pos <0 )return -EINVAL ; -if (!vpd->valid) { +if (!vpd->valid && vpd->base.len >0 ) { vpd->valid = true; vpd->base.len =pci_vpd_pci22_size (dev); }
@@ -459,6 +459,9 @@ static ssize_t pci_vpd_pci22_write(struct pci_dev *dev, loff_t pos, size_t countloff_t end = pos + count;int ret =0 ; +if (vpd->base.len ==0 ) +return -EIO ; +if (!vpd->valid)return -EAGAIN ;
drivers/pci/quirks.c +43 -0
49 lines not on this page · raw message
Signature · 1 line
1.7.1