From: Jesse Barnes <jbarnes@virtuousgeek.org>
To: Robert Hancock <hancockr@shaw.ca>
Cc: linux-kernel <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Andi Kleen <ak@suse.de>, Chuck Ebbert <cebbert@redhat.com>,
Len Brown <lenb@kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH] PCI MMCONFIG: add validation against ACPI motherboard resources
Date: Wed, 23 May 2007 17:02:30 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <200705231702.30679.jbarnes@virtuousgeek.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <4635510D.4060103@shaw.ca>
On Sunday, April 29, 2007 7:14 pm Robert Hancock wrote:
> This path adds validation of the MMCONFIG table against the ACPI
> reserved motherboard resources. If the MMCONFIG table is found to be
> reserved in ACPI, we don't bother checking the E820 table. The PCI
> Express firmware spec apparently tells BIOS developers that
> reservation in ACPI is required and E820 reservation is optional, so
> checking against ACPI first makes sense. Many BIOSes don't reserve
> the MMCONFIG region in E820 even though it is perfectly functional,
> the existing check needlessly disables MMCONFIG in these cases.
>
> In order to do this, MMCONFIG setup has been split into two phases.
> If PCI configuration type 1 is not available (like on EFI Macs) then
> MMCONFIG is enabled early as before. Otherwise, it is enabled later
> after the ACPI interpreter is enabled, since we need to be able to
> execute control methods in order to check the ACPI reserved
> resources. Presently this is just triggered off the end of ACPI
> interpreter initialization.
>
> There are a few other behavioral changes here:
>
> -Validate all MMCONFIG configurations provided, not just the first
> one.
>
> -Validate the entire required length of each configuration according
> to the provided ending bus number is reserved, not just the minimum
> required allocation.
>
> -Validate that the area is reserved even if we read it from the
> chipset directly and not from the MCFG table. This catches the case
> where the BIOS didn't set the location properly in the chipset and
> has mapped it over other things it shouldn't have. This might be
> overly pessimistic - we might be able to instead verify that no other
> reserved resources (like chipset registers) are inside this memory
> range.
>
> Some testing is needed to see if this rejects MMCONFIG on all systems
> where it is problematic. There were some patches floating around to
> read the table location out of the chipset for Intel 915 and 965, I
> think the author found the latter to be problematic since the chipset
> had the table mapped over top of motherboard resources. The extra
> checking here may catch that case if we add that chipset-specific
> support.
>
> Applies to 2.6.21.1.
>
> Signed-off-by: Robert Hancock <hancockr@shaw.ca>
Acked-by: Jesse Barnes <jesse.barnes@intel.com>
As long as we get a fix for the mmconfig based probing issues in the
other thread, I think this patch should go in. Robert, maybe you could
submit it along with this one (and an i386 equivalent)? Type 1 config
access is already a fallback for mmconfig for x86_64 at least, so it
should be safe for non-extended access too, and it avoids problems with
our lack of decode disable in the generic PCI probing code.
Signed-off-by: Jesse Barnes <jesse.barnes@intel.com>
diff --git a/arch/x86_64/pci/mmconfig.c b/arch/x86_64/pci/mmconfig.c
index 65d8273..5052f80 100644
--- a/arch/x86_64/pci/mmconfig.c
+++ b/arch/x86_64/pci/mmconfig.c
@@ -61,7 +61,7 @@ static int pci_mmcfg_read(unsigned int seg, unsigned
int bus,
}
addr = pci_dev_base(seg, bus, devfn);
- if (!addr)
+ if (!addr || reg < 256) /* Use type 1 for non-extended access */
return pci_conf1_read(seg,bus,devfn,reg,len,value);
switch (len) {
@@ -89,7 +89,7 @@ static int pci_mmcfg_write(unsigned int seg, unsigned
int bus,
return -EINVAL;
addr = pci_dev_base(seg, bus, devfn);
- if (!addr)
+ if (!addr || reg < 256) /* Use type 1 for non-extended access */
return pci_conf1_write(seg,bus,devfn,reg,len,value);
switch (len) {
prev parent reply other threads:[~2007-05-24 0:05 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 61+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2007-04-30 2:14 [RFC PATCH] PCI MMCONFIG: add validation against ACPI motherboard resources Robert Hancock
2007-04-30 2:59 ` Randy Dunlap
2007-04-30 22:59 ` Olivier Galibert
2007-04-30 23:26 ` Robert Hancock
2007-05-01 16:48 ` Jesse Barnes
2007-05-02 2:41 ` Jesse Barnes
2007-05-02 2:56 ` Jesse Barnes
2007-05-02 5:27 ` Jesse Barnes
2007-05-02 14:34 ` Robert Hancock
2007-05-02 17:57 ` Jesse Barnes
2007-05-02 23:45 ` Robert Hancock
2007-05-02 23:54 ` Jesse Barnes
2007-05-04 21:06 ` Jesse Barnes
2007-05-05 0:22 ` Robert Hancock
2007-05-21 19:10 ` Jesse Barnes
2007-05-21 19:26 ` Robert Hancock
2007-05-21 20:07 ` Jesse Barnes
2007-05-21 20:22 ` Jesse Barnes
2007-05-23 0:31 ` Robert Hancock
2007-05-23 0:38 ` Jesse Barnes
2007-05-23 0:53 ` Robert Hancock
2007-05-23 0:56 ` Jesse Barnes
2007-05-23 1:06 ` Robert Hancock
2007-05-23 18:52 ` Jesse Barnes
2007-05-23 20:20 ` Linus Torvalds
2007-05-23 20:38 ` Alan Cox
2007-05-23 20:45 ` Linus Torvalds
2007-05-23 20:49 ` Jesse Barnes
2007-05-23 20:56 ` Linus Torvalds
2007-05-23 21:03 ` Jesse Barnes
2007-05-23 21:09 ` Jeff Garzik
2007-05-23 21:35 ` Alan Cox
2007-05-23 21:35 ` Jeff Garzik
2007-05-23 21:37 ` Jesse Barnes
2007-05-23 21:42 ` Jeff Garzik
2007-05-23 23:07 ` Stephen Hemminger
2007-05-23 21:54 ` Linus Torvalds
2007-05-23 22:06 ` Jesse Barnes
2007-05-23 22:16 ` Linus Torvalds
2007-05-23 22:28 ` Jesse Barnes
2007-05-23 23:04 ` David Miller
2007-05-23 23:11 ` Jesse Barnes
2007-05-23 23:15 ` Robert Hancock
2007-05-23 23:21 ` Jesse Barnes
2007-05-23 21:20 ` Jesse Barnes
2007-05-23 22:24 ` Olivier Galibert
2007-05-23 22:31 ` Jesse Barnes
2007-05-23 22:48 ` Linus Torvalds
2007-05-23 22:55 ` Jesse Barnes
2007-05-24 0:21 ` Linus Torvalds
2007-05-24 2:59 ` Jesse Barnes
2007-05-24 3:18 ` Linus Torvalds
2007-05-24 3:20 ` Linus Torvalds
2007-05-24 3:40 ` Jesse Barnes
2007-05-24 5:19 ` Robert Hancock
2007-05-24 6:18 ` Jeff Garzik
2007-05-24 15:42 ` Linus Torvalds
2007-05-23 23:04 ` Robert Hancock
2007-05-23 23:04 ` Robert Hancock
2007-05-23 23:06 ` Jesse Barnes
2007-05-24 0:02 ` Jesse Barnes [this message]
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=200705231702.30679.jbarnes@virtuousgeek.org \
--to=jbarnes@virtuousgeek.org \
--cc=ak@suse.de \
--cc=cebbert@redhat.com \
--cc=hancockr@shaw.ca \
--cc=lenb@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.