Linux CXL
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Richard Cheng <icheng@nvidia.com>
To: "Bowman, Terry" <terry.bowman@amd.com>
Cc: sashiko-reviews@lists.linux.dev, linux-cxl@vger.kernel.org,
	 linux-pci@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v18 07/13] PCI/CXL: Add RCH support to CXL handlers
Date: Thu, 23 Jul 2026 13:35:09 +0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <amGWvnoT5XNIBMMb@MWDK4CY14F> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <3ed4793a-b1a6-4459-b1ca-03979ae8af3e@amd.com>

On Mon, Jul 20, 2026 at 10:06:34AM +0800, Bowman, Terry wrote:
> On 7/17/2026 5:43 PM, sashiko-bot@kernel.org wrote:
> > Thank you for your contribution! Sashiko AI review found 2 potential issue(s) to consider:
> > 
> > New issues:
> > - [High] Removal of explicit PCI error handler forwarding for RCH devices leaves RCDs bound after a fatal PCI error.
> This is a false positive. device_release_driver() is called in cxl_pci_error_detected() 
> 
> > 
> > Pre-existing issues:
> > - [High] Preexisting lockless dereference of `dport` returned by `cxl_pci_find_port()` and `cxl_mem_find_port()` leading to Use-After-Free.
> This is existing issue and is not planned to be fixed in this series.
> 
> > --
> > 
> > --- Patch [7]: [PATCH v18 07/13] PCI/CXL: Add RCH support to CXL handlers ---
> > commit 6a99c70b18865d01d350aa367342e701ebe6dde2
> > Author: Terry Bowman <terry.bowman@amd.com>
> > 
> > PCI/CXL: Add RCH support to CXL handlers
> > 
> > Restricted CXL Host (RCH) error handling is folded into the new CXL Port
> > error handling flow. RCH protocol errors are forwarded through the AER-CXL
> > kfifo, and the manual CXL.mem error handler invocation is removed.
> > 
> >> diff --git a/drivers/cxl/core/ras_rch.c b/drivers/cxl/core/ras_rch.c
> >> --- a/drivers/cxl/core/ras_rch.c
> >> +++ b/drivers/cxl/core/ras_rch.c
> >> @@ -96,18 +95,21 @@ static bool cxl_rch_get_aer_severity(struct aer_capability_regs *aer_regs,
> >>  	return false;
> >>  }
> >>  
> >> -void cxl_handle_rdport_errors(struct cxl_dev_state *cxlds)
> >> +void cxl_handle_rdport_errors(struct pci_dev *pdev)
> >>  {
> >> -	struct pci_dev *pdev = to_pci_dev(cxlds->dev);
> >>  	struct aer_capability_regs aer_regs;
> >>  	struct cxl_dport *dport;
> >>  	int severity;
> >>  
> >> -	struct cxl_port *port __free(put_cxl_port) =
> >> -		cxl_pci_find_port(pdev, &dport);
> >> +	struct cxl_port *port __free(put_cxl_port) = cxl_pci_find_port(pdev, NULL);
> >>  	if (!port)
> >>  		return;
> >>  
> >> +	guard(device)(&port->dev);
> >> +	dport = cxl_find_dport_by_dev(port, pdev->dev.parent);
> > 
> > [Severity: High]
> > This is a pre-existing issue, but while this change correctly closes a
> > lockless Use-After-Free window for dport here, does the same vulnerability
> > still exist in cxl_pci_setup_regs() and rcd_pcie_cap_emit()?
> > 
> > In cxl_pci_setup_regs(), cxl_rcrb_get_comp_regs() dereferences the dport
> > returned by cxl_pci_find_port() before any lock is taken.
> > 
> > Similarly, in rcd_pcie_cap_emit(), dport->regs.rcd_pcie_cap is dereferenced
> > entirely locklessly, and then the function takes guard(device)(root_dev)
> > instead of the required &root->dev lock.
> > 
> > Since rcd_pcie_cap_emit() is reachable via sysfs attributes, could an
> > unprivileged local user trigger a Use-After-Free by reading sysfs during a
> > concurrent device hot-unplug?
> > 
> > [ ... ]
> > 
> 
> This is existing issue and is not planned to be fixed in this series.
> 
> >> diff --git a/drivers/pci/pcie/aer_cxl_rch.c b/drivers/pci/pcie/aer_cxl_rch.c
> >> --- a/drivers/pci/pcie/aer_cxl_rch.c
> >> +++ b/drivers/pci/pcie/aer_cxl_rch.c
> >> @@ -34,42 +34,37 @@ static bool cxl_error_is_native(struct pci_dev *dev)
> >>  	return (pcie_ports_native || host->native_aer);
> >>  }
> >>  
> >> +struct cxl_rch_error_ctx {
> >> +	struct aer_err_info *info;
> >> +	bool enqueued;
> >> +};
> >> +
> >>  static int cxl_rch_handle_error_iter(struct pci_dev *dev, void *data)
> >>  {
> >> -	struct aer_err_info *info = (struct aer_err_info *)data;
> >> -	const struct pci_error_handlers *err_handler;
> >> +	struct cxl_rch_error_ctx *ctx = data;
> >>  
> >>  	if (!is_cxl_mem_dev(dev) || !cxl_error_is_native(dev))
> >>  		return 0;
> >>  
> >> -	guard(device)(&dev->dev);
> >> -
> >> -	err_handler = dev->driver ? dev->driver->err_handler : NULL;
> >> -	if (!err_handler)
> >> -		return 0;
> >> -
> >> -	if (info->severity == AER_CORRECTABLE) {
> >> -		if (err_handler->cor_error_detected)
> >> -			err_handler->cor_error_detected(dev);
> >> -	} else if (err_handler->error_detected) {
> >> -		if (info->severity == AER_NONFATAL)
> >> -			err_handler->error_detected(dev, pci_channel_io_normal);
> >> -		else if (info->severity == AER_FATAL)
> >> -			err_handler->error_detected(dev, pci_channel_io_frozen);
> >> -	}
> >> +	if (cxl_forward_error(dev, ctx->info))
> >> +		ctx->enqueued = true;
> > 
> > [Severity: High]
> > Does removing the explicit invocation of the err_handler leave RCDs bound
> > after a fatal PCI error?
> > 
> > The standard pcie_do_recovery() on an RCEC does not iterate over its
> > associated RC_END (RCD) devices, so this manual invocation used to handle the
> > CXL.mem driver fallback. Now that errors are routed solely through the CXL
> > protocol error work queue (__cxl_proto_err_work_fn()), the work queue only
> > panics on uncorrectable cachemem errors.
> > 
> > Does the work queue replicate the PCI recovery state machine's fallback
> > behavior, such as calling device_release_driver() to unbind the CXL.mem
> > driver on frozen channel states?
> > 
> >>  	return 0;
> >>  }
> > 
> 
> The change to forward CXL errors through Kfifo using schedulable work is 
> intentional. This series does not exactly *replicate* the PCI handling.
> 
> The device_release_driver() is called in cxl_pci_error_detected() for 
> pci_channel_io_frozen. cxl_pci_error_detected() serves as the PCIe error 
> handler for Endpoints, including RCDs.
> 
> Terry
>

Hi Terry,

I agree with you on this part, but what I can't find after this patch is the
path that invokees it for an associated RCD.

you replace all error_detected() for associated RCD with cxl_forward_error()
and queue CXL RAS work, what if a fatal case where it finds no RAS UCE?

It'll return normal and RCD driver will remain bound won't it ?

--Richard
 

  reply	other threads:[~2026-07-23  5:35 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 71+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2026-07-17 22:26 [PATCH v18 00/13] Enable CXL PCIe Port Protocol Error handling and logging Terry Bowman
2026-07-17 22:26 ` [PATCH v18 01/13] cxl/ras: Fix cxl_rch_get_aer_severity() wrong severity register Terry Bowman
2026-07-17 22:43   ` sashiko-bot
2026-07-20 20:09   ` Dave Jiang
2026-07-20 20:36     ` Bowman, Terry
2026-07-20 21:26   ` Jonathan Cameron
2026-07-23  4:04   ` Richard Cheng
2026-07-17 22:26 ` [PATCH v18 02/13] acpi/apei/ghes: Use raw_spinlock_t for CXL CPER work locks Terry Bowman
2026-07-17 22:49   ` sashiko-bot
2026-07-20 15:02     ` Bowman, Terry
2026-07-20 21:36       ` Jonathan Cameron
2026-07-20 20:12   ` Dave Jiang
2026-07-20 20:38     ` Bowman, Terry
2026-07-20 21:41   ` Jonathan Cameron
2026-07-17 22:26 ` [PATCH v18 03/13] cxl: Tighten CPER kfifo registration API and symbol visibility Terry Bowman
2026-07-17 22:37   ` sashiko-bot
2026-07-20 20:15   ` Dave Jiang
2026-07-20 21:59   ` Jonathan Cameron
2026-07-17 22:26 ` [PATCH v18 04/13] cxl: Rename find_cxl_port() to find_cxl_port_by_dport() Terry Bowman
2026-07-17 22:34   ` sashiko-bot
2026-07-20 20:25   ` Dave Jiang
2026-07-20 22:02   ` Jonathan Cameron
2026-07-17 22:26 ` [PATCH v18 05/13] PCI/AER: Introduce AER-CXL protocol error kfifo Terry Bowman
2026-07-17 22:35   ` sashiko-bot
2026-07-20 20:29   ` Dave Jiang
2026-07-20 22:41   ` Jonathan Cameron
2026-07-23  5:46     ` Richard Cheng
2026-07-23 18:27       ` Bowman, Terry
2026-07-17 22:26 ` [PATCH v18 06/13] PCI: Establish common CXL Port protocol error flow Terry Bowman
2026-07-17 22:43   ` sashiko-bot
2026-07-20 20:44   ` Dave Jiang
2026-07-20 23:05   ` Jonathan Cameron
2026-07-17 22:27 ` [PATCH v18 07/13] PCI/CXL: Add RCH support to CXL handlers Terry Bowman
2026-07-17 22:43   ` sashiko-bot
2026-07-20 15:06     ` Bowman, Terry
2026-07-23  5:35       ` Richard Cheng [this message]
2026-07-23 19:58         ` Bowman, Terry
2026-07-23 20:03         ` Bowman, Terry
2026-07-30 15:47         ` Bowman, Terry
2026-07-20 21:47   ` Dave Jiang
2026-07-20 23:12   ` Jonathan Cameron
2026-07-17 22:27 ` [PATCH v18 08/13] cxl/pci: Thread port and dport through RAS handling helpers Terry Bowman
2026-07-17 22:40   ` sashiko-bot
2026-07-20 22:15   ` Dave Jiang
2026-07-20 23:17   ` Jonathan Cameron
2026-07-17 22:27 ` [PATCH v18 09/13] cxl: Update CXL Endpoint AER handler Terry Bowman
2026-07-17 22:53   ` sashiko-bot
2026-07-20 15:09     ` Bowman, Terry
2026-07-20 22:25   ` Dave Jiang
2026-07-20 23:29   ` Jonathan Cameron
2026-07-17 22:27 ` [PATCH v18 10/13] cxl: Add port and dport identifiers to CXL AER trace events Terry Bowman
2026-07-17 22:53   ` sashiko-bot
2026-07-20 15:14     ` Bowman, Terry
2026-07-20 23:53       ` Jonathan Cameron
2026-07-20 22:44   ` Dave Jiang
2026-07-21  0:00   ` Jonathan Cameron
2026-07-21 20:59     ` Bowman, Terry
2026-07-17 22:27 ` [PATCH v18 11/13] PCI: Cache PCI DSN into pci_dev->dsn during probe Terry Bowman
2026-07-17 22:44   ` sashiko-bot
2026-07-18  7:02   ` Lukas Wunner
2026-07-20 15:48     ` Bowman, Terry
2026-07-21  8:37       ` Lukas Wunner
2026-07-17 22:27 ` [PATCH v18 12/13] PCI/CXL: Mask/Unmask CXL protocol errors Terry Bowman
2026-07-17 22:58   ` sashiko-bot
2026-07-20 22:52   ` Dave Jiang
2026-07-21  0:10   ` Jonathan Cameron
2026-07-17 22:27 ` [PATCH v18 13/13] Documentation: cxl: Document CXL protocol error handling Terry Bowman
2026-07-17 22:43   ` sashiko-bot
2026-07-20 23:40   ` Dave Jiang
2026-07-21  0:19   ` Jonathan Cameron
2026-07-23  3:53 ` [PATCH v18 00/13] Enable CXL PCIe Port Protocol Error handling and logging Richard Cheng

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=amGWvnoT5XNIBMMb@MWDK4CY14F \
    --to=icheng@nvidia.com \
    --cc=linux-cxl@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-pci@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=sashiko-reviews@lists.linux.dev \
    --cc=terry.bowman@amd.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