From: Jonathan Cameron <Jonathan.Cameron@huawei.com>
To: Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@intel.com>
Cc: Ira Weiny <ira.weiny@intel.com>,
"Jiang, Dave" <dave.jiang@intel.com>,
Alison Schofield <alison.schofield@intel.com>,
Vishal Verma <vishal.l.verma@intel.com>,
Ben Widawsky <bwidawsk@kernel.org>,
"Robert Richter" <rrichter@amd.com>, <linux-cxl@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 3/4] cxl/uapi: Only return valid commands from cxl_query_cmd()
Date: Mon, 30 Jan 2023 15:06:33 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20230130150633.00005cd2@huawei.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <63d483332ff46_3a36e52942c@dwillia2-xfh.jf.intel.com.notmuch>
On Fri, 27 Jan 2023 18:06:43 -0800
Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@intel.com> wrote:
> Ira Weiny wrote:
> > It was pointed out that commands not supported by the device or excluded
> > by the kernel were being returned in cxl_query_cmd().[1]
> >
> > While libcxl correctly handles failing commands, it is more efficient to
> > not issue an invalid command in the first place.
> >
> > Exclude both kernel exclusive and disabled commands from the list of
> > commands returned by cxl_query_cmd().
> >
> > [1] https://lore.kernel.org/all/63b4ec4e37cc1_5178e2941d@dwillia2-xfh.jf.intel.com.notmuch/
> >
> > Suggested-by: Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@intel.com>
> > Signed-off-by: Ira Weiny <ira.weiny@intel.com>
> >
> > ---
> > Changes for v2:
> > New patch
> > ---
> > drivers/cxl/core/mbox.c | 35 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++---------
> > 1 file changed, 26 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/cxl/core/mbox.c b/drivers/cxl/core/mbox.c
> > index b03fba212799..a1618b7f01e5 100644
> > --- a/drivers/cxl/core/mbox.c
> > +++ b/drivers/cxl/core/mbox.c
> > @@ -326,12 +326,27 @@ static int cxl_to_mem_cmd_raw(struct cxl_mem_command *mem_cmd,
> > return 0;
> > }
> >
> > +/* Return 0 if the cmd id is available for userspace */
> > +static int cxl_cmd_id_user(__u32 id, struct cxl_dev_state *cxlds)
> > +{
> > + /* Check that the command is enabled for hardware */
> > + if (!test_bit(id, cxlds->enabled_cmds))
> > + return -ENOTTY;
> > +
> > + /* Check that the command is not claimed for exclusive kernel use */
> > + if (test_bit(id, cxlds->exclusive_cmds))
> > + return -EBUSY;
> > +
> > + return 0;
> > +}
> > +
> > static int cxl_to_mem_cmd(struct cxl_mem_command *mem_cmd,
> > const struct cxl_send_command *send_cmd,
> > struct cxl_dev_state *cxlds)
> > {
> > struct cxl_mem_command *c = &cxl_mem_commands[send_cmd->id];
> > const struct cxl_command_info *info = &c->info;
> > + int rc;
> >
> > if (send_cmd->flags & ~CXL_MEM_COMMAND_FLAG_MASK)
> > return -EINVAL;
> > @@ -342,13 +357,9 @@ static int cxl_to_mem_cmd(struct cxl_mem_command *mem_cmd,
> > if (send_cmd->in.rsvd || send_cmd->out.rsvd)
> > return -EINVAL;
> >
> > - /* Check that the command is enabled for hardware */
> > - if (!test_bit(info->id, cxlds->enabled_cmds))
> > - return -ENOTTY;
> > -
> > - /* Check that the command is not claimed for exclusive kernel use */
> > - if (test_bit(info->id, cxlds->exclusive_cmds))
> > - return -EBUSY;
> > + rc = cxl_cmd_id_user(info->id, cxlds);
> > + if (rc)
> > + return rc;
> >
> > /* Check the input buffer is the expected size */
> > if ((info->size_in != CXL_VARIABLE_PAYLOAD) &&
> > @@ -446,9 +457,15 @@ int cxl_query_cmd(struct cxl_memdev *cxlmd,
> > */
> > cxl_for_each_cmd(cmd) {
> > const struct cxl_command_info *info = &cmd->info;
> > + struct cxl_dev_state *cxlds = cxlmd->cxlds;
> > + int rc;
> >
> > - if (copy_to_user(&q->commands[j++], info, sizeof(*info)))
> > - return -EFAULT;
> > + rc = cxl_cmd_id_user(info->id, cxlds);
> > + if (!rc) {
> > + if (copy_to_user(&q->commands[j++], info,
> > + sizeof(*info)))
> > + return -EFAULT;
> > + }
>
> I like where this is going, but I think it is still useful to return all
> the commands even if they are not enabled or currently exclusive,
> especially since that expectation has already shipped.
>
> I also think it is a bug that this command passes kernel internal flags
> like CXL_CMD_FLAG_FORCE_ENABLE. So let's declare new flags in
> include/uapi/linux/cxl_mem.h starting at BIT(1) and do something like:
>
So this is OK in that we are just adding more info in the flags
field so backwards compatibility is better maintained than simply hiding
commands.
> diff --git a/include/uapi/linux/cxl_mem.h b/include/uapi/linux/cxl_mem.h
> index c71021a2a9ed..1ba0e12fd410 100644
> --- a/include/uapi/linux/cxl_mem.h
> +++ b/include/uapi/linux/cxl_mem.h
> @@ -87,8 +87,10 @@ struct cxl_command_info {
> __u32 id;
>
> __u32 flags;
> -#define CXL_MEM_COMMAND_FLAG_MASK GENMASK(0, 0)
> -
> +#define CXL_MEM_COMMAND_FLAG_MASK GENMASK(2, 1)
> +#define CXL_MEM_COMMAND_FLAG_RESERVED BIT(0)
Good to add a comment on this flag. I've been staring at it an can't
figure out what it was ever for...
> +#define CXL_MEM_COMMAND_FLAG_ENABLED BIT(1)
ENABLED isn't the clearest naming... Perhaps _AVAILABLE_TO_USER
or something like that would be easier?
> +#define CXL_MEM_COMMAND_FLAG_EXCLUSIVE BIT(2)
What does EXCLUSIVE mean to a userspace caller? EXCLUSIVE to whom?
Other than bikeshedding this looks good to me.
Thanks,
Jonathan
> __u32 size_in;
> __u32 size_out;
> };
> diff --git a/drivers/cxl/core/mbox.c b/drivers/cxl/core/mbox.c
> index 6ed8e3654939..24469668f1af 100644
> --- a/drivers/cxl/core/mbox.c
> +++ b/drivers/cxl/core/mbox.c
> @@ -427,6 +427,7 @@ static int cxl_validate_cmd_from_user(struct cxl_mbox_cmd *mbox_cmd,
> int cxl_query_cmd(struct cxl_memdev *cxlmd,
> struct cxl_mem_query_commands __user *q)
> {
> + struct cxl_dev_state *cxlds = cxlmd->cxlds;
> struct device *dev = &cxlmd->dev;
> struct cxl_mem_command *cmd;
> u32 n_commands;
> @@ -446,9 +447,18 @@ int cxl_query_cmd(struct cxl_memdev *cxlmd,
> * structures.
> */
> cxl_for_each_cmd(cmd) {
> - const struct cxl_command_info *info = &cmd->info;
> + struct cxl_command_info info = cmd->info;
> +
> + /* wipe kernel internal flags */
> + info.flags = 0;
>
> - if (copy_to_user(&q->commands[j++], info, sizeof(*info)))
> + /* reflect exclusive and enabled */
> + if (test_bit(info.id, cxlds->enabled_cmds))
> + info.flags |= CXL_MEM_COMMAND_FLAG_ENABLED;
> + if (test_bit(info.id, cxlds->exclusive_cmds))
> + info.flags |= CXL_MEM_COMMAND_FLAG_EXCLUSIVE;
> +
> + if (copy_to_user(&q->commands[j++], &info, sizeof(info)))
> return -EFAULT;
>
> if (j == n_commands)
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2023-01-30 15:06 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 16+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2023-01-28 0:09 [PATCH v2 0/4] CXL: Miscellaneous fixes Ira Weiny
2023-01-28 0:09 ` [PATCH v2 1/4] cxl/mem: Remove unused CXL_CMD_FLAG_NONE define Ira Weiny
2023-01-31 16:23 ` Dave Jiang
2023-01-28 0:09 ` [PATCH v2 2/4] cxl/uapi: Add warning on CXL command enum Ira Weiny
2023-01-31 16:24 ` Dave Jiang
2023-01-28 0:09 ` [PATCH v2 3/4] cxl/uapi: Only return valid commands from cxl_query_cmd() Ira Weiny
2023-01-28 2:06 ` Dan Williams
2023-01-30 15:06 ` Jonathan Cameron [this message]
2023-01-30 19:42 ` Dan Williams
2023-01-31 14:57 ` Jonathan Cameron
2023-01-30 22:23 ` Ira Weiny
2023-01-30 23:52 ` Dan Williams
2023-02-01 17:57 ` Ira Weiny
2023-02-01 18:31 ` Dan Williams
2023-01-31 0:49 ` Alison Schofield
2023-01-28 0:09 ` [PATCH v2 4/4] cxl/mem: Fix UAPI command comment Ira Weiny
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=20230130150633.00005cd2@huawei.com \
--to=jonathan.cameron@huawei.com \
--cc=alison.schofield@intel.com \
--cc=bwidawsk@kernel.org \
--cc=dan.j.williams@intel.com \
--cc=dave.jiang@intel.com \
--cc=ira.weiny@intel.com \
--cc=linux-cxl@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=rrichter@amd.com \
--cc=vishal.l.verma@intel.com \
/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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox