* [Resend] [PATCH] pci-hyperv: use kmalloc to allocate hypercall params buffer @ 2016-11-08 8:14 Long Li 2016-11-08 7:00 ` Greg KH 0 siblings, 1 reply; 4+ messages in thread From: Long Li @ 2016-11-08 8:14 UTC (permalink / raw) To: K. Y. Srinivasan, Haiyang Zhang, Bjorn Helgaas Cc: devel, linux-pci, linux-kernel, Long Li From: Long Li <longli@microsoft.com> hv_do_hypercall assumes that we pass a segment from a physically continuous buffer. Buffer allocated on the stack may not work if CONFIG_VMAP_STACK=y is set. Use kmalloc to allocate this buffer. Signed-off-by: Long Li <longli@microsoft.com> Reported-by: Haiyang Zhang <haiyangz@microsoft.com> --- drivers/pci/host/pci-hyperv.c | 24 +++++++++++++----------- 1 file changed, 13 insertions(+), 11 deletions(-) diff --git a/drivers/pci/host/pci-hyperv.c b/drivers/pci/host/pci-hyperv.c index 763ff87..97e6daf 100644 --- a/drivers/pci/host/pci-hyperv.c +++ b/drivers/pci/host/pci-hyperv.c @@ -378,6 +378,7 @@ struct hv_pcibus_device { struct msi_domain_info msi_info; struct msi_controller msi_chip; struct irq_domain *irq_domain; + struct retarget_msi_interrupt retarget_msi_interrupt_params; }; /* @@ -774,7 +775,7 @@ void hv_irq_unmask(struct irq_data *data) { struct msi_desc *msi_desc = irq_data_get_msi_desc(data); struct irq_cfg *cfg = irqd_cfg(data); - struct retarget_msi_interrupt params; + struct retarget_msi_interrupt *params; struct hv_pcibus_device *hbus; struct cpumask *dest; struct pci_bus *pbus; @@ -785,23 +786,24 @@ void hv_irq_unmask(struct irq_data *data) pdev = msi_desc_to_pci_dev(msi_desc); pbus = pdev->bus; hbus = container_of(pbus->sysdata, struct hv_pcibus_device, sysdata); - - memset(¶ms, 0, sizeof(params)); - params.partition_id = HV_PARTITION_ID_SELF; - params.source = 1; /* MSI(-X) */ - params.address = msi_desc->msg.address_lo; - params.data = msi_desc->msg.data; - params.device_id = (hbus->hdev->dev_instance.b[5] << 24) | + params = &hbus->retarget_msi_interrupt_params; + + memset(params, 0, sizeof(*params)); + params->partition_id = HV_PARTITION_ID_SELF; + params->source = 1; /* MSI(-X) */ + params->address = msi_desc->msg.address_lo; + params->data = msi_desc->msg.data; + params->device_id = (hbus->hdev->dev_instance.b[5] << 24) | (hbus->hdev->dev_instance.b[4] << 16) | (hbus->hdev->dev_instance.b[7] << 8) | (hbus->hdev->dev_instance.b[6] & 0xf8) | PCI_FUNC(pdev->devfn); - params.vector = cfg->vector; + params->vector = cfg->vector; for_each_cpu_and(cpu, dest, cpu_online_mask) - params.vp_mask |= (1ULL << vmbus_cpu_number_to_vp_number(cpu)); + params->vp_mask |= (1ULL << vmbus_cpu_number_to_vp_number(cpu)); - hv_do_hypercall(HVCALL_RETARGET_INTERRUPT, ¶ms, NULL); + hv_do_hypercall(HVCALL_RETARGET_INTERRUPT, params, NULL); pci_msi_unmask_irq(data); } -- 2.7.4 ^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread
* Re: [Resend] [PATCH] pci-hyperv: use kmalloc to allocate hypercall params buffer 2016-11-08 8:14 [Resend] [PATCH] pci-hyperv: use kmalloc to allocate hypercall params buffer Long Li @ 2016-11-08 7:00 ` Greg KH [not found] ` <BN3PR03MB2227A432B0288764BA9EE562CEA60@BN3PR03MB2227.namprd03.prod.outlook.com> 0 siblings, 1 reply; 4+ messages in thread From: Greg KH @ 2016-11-08 7:00 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Long Li Cc: K. Y. Srinivasan, Haiyang Zhang, Bjorn Helgaas, devel, linux-kernel, linux-pci On Tue, Nov 08, 2016 at 12:14:14AM -0800, Long Li wrote: > From: Long Li <longli@microsoft.com> > > hv_do_hypercall assumes that we pass a segment from a physically continuous buffer. Buffer allocated on the stack may not work if CONFIG_VMAP_STACK=y is set. Use kmalloc to allocate this buffer. Please wrap your changelog at 72 columns. > > Signed-off-by: Long Li <longli@microsoft.com> > Reported-by: Haiyang Zhang <haiyangz@microsoft.com> > --- > drivers/pci/host/pci-hyperv.c | 24 +++++++++++++----------- > 1 file changed, 13 insertions(+), 11 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/drivers/pci/host/pci-hyperv.c b/drivers/pci/host/pci-hyperv.c > index 763ff87..97e6daf 100644 > --- a/drivers/pci/host/pci-hyperv.c > +++ b/drivers/pci/host/pci-hyperv.c > @@ -378,6 +378,7 @@ struct hv_pcibus_device { > struct msi_domain_info msi_info; > struct msi_controller msi_chip; > struct irq_domain *irq_domain; > + struct retarget_msi_interrupt retarget_msi_interrupt_params; Can you handle potentially unaligned accesses like this? Is there some lock preventing you from using this structure more than once at the same time? > }; > > /* > @@ -774,7 +775,7 @@ void hv_irq_unmask(struct irq_data *data) > { > struct msi_desc *msi_desc = irq_data_get_msi_desc(data); > struct irq_cfg *cfg = irqd_cfg(data); > - struct retarget_msi_interrupt params; > + struct retarget_msi_interrupt *params; > struct hv_pcibus_device *hbus; > struct cpumask *dest; > struct pci_bus *pbus; > @@ -785,23 +786,24 @@ void hv_irq_unmask(struct irq_data *data) > pdev = msi_desc_to_pci_dev(msi_desc); > pbus = pdev->bus; > hbus = container_of(pbus->sysdata, struct hv_pcibus_device, sysdata); > - > - memset(¶ms, 0, sizeof(params)); > - params.partition_id = HV_PARTITION_ID_SELF; > - params.source = 1; /* MSI(-X) */ > - params.address = msi_desc->msg.address_lo; > - params.data = msi_desc->msg.data; > - params.device_id = (hbus->hdev->dev_instance.b[5] << 24) | > + params = &hbus->retarget_msi_interrupt_params; > + > + memset(params, 0, sizeof(*params)); > + params->partition_id = HV_PARTITION_ID_SELF; > + params->source = 1; /* MSI(-X) */ > + params->address = msi_desc->msg.address_lo; > + params->data = msi_desc->msg.data; > + params->device_id = (hbus->hdev->dev_instance.b[5] << 24) | > (hbus->hdev->dev_instance.b[4] << 16) | > (hbus->hdev->dev_instance.b[7] << 8) | > (hbus->hdev->dev_instance.b[6] & 0xf8) | > PCI_FUNC(pdev->devfn); > - params.vector = cfg->vector; > + params->vector = cfg->vector; > > for_each_cpu_and(cpu, dest, cpu_online_mask) > - params.vp_mask |= (1ULL << vmbus_cpu_number_to_vp_number(cpu)); > + params->vp_mask |= (1ULL << vmbus_cpu_number_to_vp_number(cpu)); > > - hv_do_hypercall(HVCALL_RETARGET_INTERRUPT, ¶ms, NULL); > + hv_do_hypercall(HVCALL_RETARGET_INTERRUPT, params, NULL); As you only use this in one spot, why not just allocate it here and then free it? Why add it to the pcibus device structure? thanks, greg k-h ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread
[parent not found: <BN3PR03MB2227A432B0288764BA9EE562CEA60@BN3PR03MB2227.namprd03.prod.outlook.com>]
* RE: [Resend] [PATCH] pci-hyperv: use kmalloc to allocate hypercall params buffer [not found] ` <BN3PR03MB2227A432B0288764BA9EE562CEA60@BN3PR03MB2227.namprd03.prod.outlook.com> @ 2016-11-08 17:03 ` KY Srinivasan 2016-11-08 20:49 ` Long Li 1 sibling, 0 replies; 4+ messages in thread From: KY Srinivasan @ 2016-11-08 17:03 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Long Li, Greg KH Cc: Haiyang Zhang, Bjorn Helgaas, devel@linuxdriverproject.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-pci@vger.kernel.org > -----Original Message----- > From: Long Li > Sent: Tuesday, November 8, 2016 8:57 AM > To: Greg KH <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org> > Cc: KY Srinivasan <kys@microsoft.com>; Haiyang Zhang > <haiyangz@microsoft.com>; Bjorn Helgaas <bhelgaas@google.com>; > devel@linuxdriverproject.org; linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org; linux- > pci@vger.kernel.org > Subject: RE: [Resend] [PATCH] pci-hyperv: use kmalloc to allocate hyperca= ll > params buffer >=20 >=20 >=20 > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Greg KH [mailto:gregkh@linuxfoundation.org] > > Sent: Monday, November 7, 2016 11:00 PM > > To: Long Li <longli@microsoft.com> > > Cc: KY Srinivasan <kys@microsoft.com>; Haiyang Zhang > > <haiyangz@microsoft.com>; Bjorn Helgaas <bhelgaas@google.com>; > > devel@linuxdriverproject.org; linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org; linux- > > pci@vger.kernel.org > > Subject: Re: [Resend] [PATCH] pci-hyperv: use kmalloc to allocate hyper= call > > params buffer > > > > On Tue, Nov 08, 2016 at 12:14:14AM -0800, Long Li wrote: > > > From: Long Li <longli@microsoft.com> > > > > > > hv_do_hypercall assumes that we pass a segment from a physically > > continuous buffer. Buffer allocated on the stack may not work if > > CONFIG_VMAP_STACK=3Dy is set. Use kmalloc to allocate this buffer. > > > > Please wrap your changelog at 72 columns. Long, this should not be part of the commit message. Please include changes= in each version below the line (----) Regards, K. Y=20 > > > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Long Li <longli@microsoft.com> > > > Reported-by: Haiyang Zhang <haiyangz@microsoft.com> > > > --- > > > drivers/pci/host/pci-hyperv.c | 24 +++++++++++++----------- > > > 1 file changed, 13 insertions(+), 11 deletions(-) > > > > > > diff --git a/drivers/pci/host/pci-hyperv.c > > > b/drivers/pci/host/pci-hyperv.c index 763ff87..97e6daf 100644 > > > --- a/drivers/pci/host/pci-hyperv.c > > > +++ b/drivers/pci/host/pci-hyperv.c > > > @@ -378,6 +378,7 @@ struct hv_pcibus_device { > > > struct msi_domain_info msi_info; > > > struct msi_controller msi_chip; > > > struct irq_domain *irq_domain; > > > + struct retarget_msi_interrupt retarget_msi_interrupt_params; > > > > Can you handle potentially unaligned accesses like this? Is there some= lock > > preventing you from using this structure more than once at the same tim= e? > > > > > }; > > > > > > /* > > > @@ -774,7 +775,7 @@ void hv_irq_unmask(struct irq_data *data) { > > > struct msi_desc *msi_desc =3D irq_data_get_msi_desc(data); > > > struct irq_cfg *cfg =3D irqd_cfg(data); > > > - struct retarget_msi_interrupt params; > > > + struct retarget_msi_interrupt *params; > > > struct hv_pcibus_device *hbus; > > > struct cpumask *dest; > > > struct pci_bus *pbus; > > > @@ -785,23 +786,24 @@ void hv_irq_unmask(struct irq_data *data) > > > pdev =3D msi_desc_to_pci_dev(msi_desc); > > > pbus =3D pdev->bus; > > > hbus =3D container_of(pbus->sysdata, struct hv_pcibus_device, > > > sysdata); > > > - > > > - memset(¶ms, 0, sizeof(params)); > > > - params.partition_id =3D HV_PARTITION_ID_SELF; > > > - params.source =3D 1; /* MSI(-X) */ > > > - params.address =3D msi_desc->msg.address_lo; > > > - params.data =3D msi_desc->msg.data; > > > - params.device_id =3D (hbus->hdev->dev_instance.b[5] << 24) | > > > + params =3D &hbus->retarget_msi_interrupt_params; > > > + > > > + memset(params, 0, sizeof(*params)); > > > + params->partition_id =3D HV_PARTITION_ID_SELF; > > > + params->source =3D 1; /* MSI(-X) */ > > > + params->address =3D msi_desc->msg.address_lo; > > > + params->data =3D msi_desc->msg.data; > > > + params->device_id =3D (hbus->hdev->dev_instance.b[5] << 24) | > > > (hbus->hdev->dev_instance.b[4] << 16) | > > > (hbus->hdev->dev_instance.b[7] << 8) | > > > (hbus->hdev->dev_instance.b[6] & 0xf8) | > > > PCI_FUNC(pdev->devfn); > > > - params.vector =3D cfg->vector; > > > + params->vector =3D cfg->vector; > > > > > > for_each_cpu_and(cpu, dest, cpu_online_mask) > > > - params.vp_mask |=3D (1ULL << > > vmbus_cpu_number_to_vp_number(cpu)); > > > + params->vp_mask |=3D (1ULL << > > vmbus_cpu_number_to_vp_number(cpu)); > > > > > > - hv_do_hypercall(HVCALL_RETARGET_INTERRUPT, ¶ms, NULL); > > > + hv_do_hypercall(HVCALL_RETARGET_INTERRUPT, params, NULL); > > > > As you only use this in one spot, why not just allocate it here and the= n free > > it? Why add it to the pcibus device structure? >=20 > Thanks Greg. I will send a V2. >=20 > > > > thanks, > > > > greg k-h ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread
* RE: [Resend] [PATCH] pci-hyperv: use kmalloc to allocate hypercall params buffer [not found] ` <BN3PR03MB2227A432B0288764BA9EE562CEA60@BN3PR03MB2227.namprd03.prod.outlook.com> 2016-11-08 17:03 ` KY Srinivasan @ 2016-11-08 20:49 ` Long Li 1 sibling, 0 replies; 4+ messages in thread From: Long Li @ 2016-11-08 20:49 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Long Li, Greg KH Cc: linux-pci@vger.kernel.org, Haiyang Zhang, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Bjorn Helgaas, devel@linuxdriverproject.org > -----Original Message----- > From: devel [mailto:driverdev-devel-bounces@linuxdriverproject.org] On > Behalf Of Long Li > Sent: Tuesday, November 8, 2016 8:57 AM > To: Greg KH <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org> > Cc: linux-pci@vger.kernel.org; Haiyang Zhang <haiyangz@microsoft.com>; > linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org; Bjorn Helgaas <bhelgaas@google.com>; > devel@linuxdriverproject.org > Subject: RE: [Resend] [PATCH] pci-hyperv: use kmalloc to allocate hyperca= ll > params buffer >=20 > This sender failed our fraud detection checks and may not be who they > appear to be. Learn about spoofing at http://aka.ms/LearnAboutSpoofing >=20 > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Greg KH [mailto:gregkh@linuxfoundation.org] > > Sent: Monday, November 7, 2016 11:00 PM > > To: Long Li <longli@microsoft.com> > > Cc: KY Srinivasan <kys@microsoft.com>; Haiyang Zhang > > <haiyangz@microsoft.com>; Bjorn Helgaas <bhelgaas@google.com>; > > devel@linuxdriverproject.org; linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org; linux- > > pci@vger.kernel.org > > Subject: Re: [Resend] [PATCH] pci-hyperv: use kmalloc to allocate > > hypercall params buffer > > > > On Tue, Nov 08, 2016 at 12:14:14AM -0800, Long Li wrote: > > > From: Long Li <longli@microsoft.com> > > > > > > hv_do_hypercall assumes that we pass a segment from a physically > > continuous buffer. Buffer allocated on the stack may not work if > > CONFIG_VMAP_STACK=3Dy is set. Use kmalloc to allocate this buffer. > > > > Please wrap your changelog at 72 columns. > > > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Long Li <longli@microsoft.com> > > > Reported-by: Haiyang Zhang <haiyangz@microsoft.com> > > > --- > > > drivers/pci/host/pci-hyperv.c | 24 +++++++++++++----------- > > > 1 file changed, 13 insertions(+), 11 deletions(-) > > > > > > diff --git a/drivers/pci/host/pci-hyperv.c > > > b/drivers/pci/host/pci-hyperv.c index 763ff87..97e6daf 100644 > > > --- a/drivers/pci/host/pci-hyperv.c > > > +++ b/drivers/pci/host/pci-hyperv.c > > > @@ -378,6 +378,7 @@ struct hv_pcibus_device { > > > struct msi_domain_info msi_info; > > > struct msi_controller msi_chip; > > > struct irq_domain *irq_domain; > > > + struct retarget_msi_interrupt retarget_msi_interrupt_params; > > > > Can you handle potentially unaligned accesses like this? Is there > > some lock preventing you from using this structure more than once at th= e > same time? > > > > > }; > > > > > > /* > > > @@ -774,7 +775,7 @@ void hv_irq_unmask(struct irq_data *data) { > > > struct msi_desc *msi_desc =3D irq_data_get_msi_desc(data); > > > struct irq_cfg *cfg =3D irqd_cfg(data); > > > - struct retarget_msi_interrupt params; > > > + struct retarget_msi_interrupt *params; > > > struct hv_pcibus_device *hbus; > > > struct cpumask *dest; > > > struct pci_bus *pbus; > > > @@ -785,23 +786,24 @@ void hv_irq_unmask(struct irq_data *data) > > > pdev =3D msi_desc_to_pci_dev(msi_desc); > > > pbus =3D pdev->bus; > > > hbus =3D container_of(pbus->sysdata, struct hv_pcibus_device, > > > sysdata); > > > - > > > - memset(¶ms, 0, sizeof(params)); > > > - params.partition_id =3D HV_PARTITION_ID_SELF; > > > - params.source =3D 1; /* MSI(-X) */ > > > - params.address =3D msi_desc->msg.address_lo; > > > - params.data =3D msi_desc->msg.data; > > > - params.device_id =3D (hbus->hdev->dev_instance.b[5] << 24) | > > > + params =3D &hbus->retarget_msi_interrupt_params; > > > + > > > + memset(params, 0, sizeof(*params)); > > > + params->partition_id =3D HV_PARTITION_ID_SELF; > > > + params->source =3D 1; /* MSI(-X) */ > > > + params->address =3D msi_desc->msg.address_lo; > > > + params->data =3D msi_desc->msg.data; > > > + params->device_id =3D (hbus->hdev->dev_instance.b[5] << 24) | > > > (hbus->hdev->dev_instance.b[4] << 16) | > > > (hbus->hdev->dev_instance.b[7] << 8) | > > > (hbus->hdev->dev_instance.b[6] & 0xf8) | > > > PCI_FUNC(pdev->devfn); > > > - params.vector =3D cfg->vector; > > > + params->vector =3D cfg->vector; > > > > > > for_each_cpu_and(cpu, dest, cpu_online_mask) > > > - params.vp_mask |=3D (1ULL << > > vmbus_cpu_number_to_vp_number(cpu)); > > > + params->vp_mask |=3D (1ULL << > > vmbus_cpu_number_to_vp_number(cpu)); > > > > > > - hv_do_hypercall(HVCALL_RETARGET_INTERRUPT, ¶ms, NULL); > > > + hv_do_hypercall(HVCALL_RETARGET_INTERRUPT, params, NULL); > > > > As you only use this in one spot, why not just allocate it here and > > then free it? Why add it to the pcibus device structure? >=20 > Thanks Greg. I will send a V2. Sorry forgot to address the reason why we don't just allocate the buffer he= re. This function cannot fail. So it's better to pre-allocate the buffer. >=20 > > > > thanks, > > > > greg k-h > _______________________________________________ > devel mailing list > devel@linuxdriverproject.org > https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=3Dhttp%3A%2F%2Fdriverd > ev.linuxdriverproject.org%2Fmailman%2Flistinfo%2Fdriverdev- > devel&data=3D02%7C01%7Clongli%40microsoft.com%7C6e28f5459da345cdb5e > 408d407f836f0%7C72f988bf86f141af91ab2d7cd011db47%7C1%7C0%7C636142 > 210041216500&sdata=3DvvVxGQUet7KMuRgs9%2BRbR8JE70rKF1AJo%2Fu3zx% > 2FQNwY%3D&reserved=3D0 ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2016-11-08 20:49 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 4+ messages (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2016-11-08 8:14 [Resend] [PATCH] pci-hyperv: use kmalloc to allocate hypercall params buffer Long Li
2016-11-08 7:00 ` Greg KH
[not found] ` <BN3PR03MB2227A432B0288764BA9EE562CEA60@BN3PR03MB2227.namprd03.prod.outlook.com>
2016-11-08 17:03 ` KY Srinivasan
2016-11-08 20:49 ` Long Li
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox; as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).