Linux PCI subsystem development
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: sashiko-bot@kernel.org
To: "Manivannan Sadhasivam" <mani@kernel.org>
Cc: linux-pci@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 2/8] PCI/ASPM: Add pci_force_enable_link_state() API
Date: Wed, 08 Jul 2026 14:44:18 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20260708144418.AF5A01F00A3D@smtp.kernel.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20260708-pci-aspm-fix-v3-2-6bd72451746e@kernel.org>

Thank you for your contribution! Sashiko AI review found 5 potential issue(s) to consider:

New issues:
- [High] pci_force_enable_link_state() fails to override init-disabled ASPM states because it does not handle uninitialized aspm_capable masks.
- [High] pci_force_enable_link_state() fails to re-enable Clock PM (CLKPM) because it does not clear link->clkpm_disable.
- [High] pci_force_enable_link_state() fails with -EPERM when aspm_disabled is true, preventing driver state restoration.
- [Medium] The kernel doc for `pci_force_enable_link_state()` incorrectly advises callers to use `pcie_aspm_enabled()`, which returns a `bool` instead of a bitmask.

Pre-existing issues:
- [Critical] TOCTOU race causing Use-After-Free of `pcie_link_state` when device removal interleaves with `__pci_enable_link_state()`.
--

--- Patch [2]: [PATCH v3 2/8] PCI/ASPM: Add pci_force_enable_link_state() API ---
commit 2bf493d2bfb473abb29a075bfd6fe57330878665
Author: Manivannan Sadhasivam <manivannan.sadhasivam@oss.qualcomm.com>

PCI/ASPM: Add pci_force_enable_link_state() API

This patch introduces the pci_force_enable_link_state() API to allow
drivers to re-enable ASPM states that were previously disabled via
pci_disable_link_state() or disabled during initialization. It adds a force
parameter to the shared helper __pci_enable_link_state() to clear the
disabled states before enabling.

> diff --git a/drivers/pci/pcie/aspm.c b/drivers/pci/pcie/aspm.c
> --- a/drivers/pci/pcie/aspm.c
> +++ b/drivers/pci/pcie/aspm.c
[ ... ]
> @@ -1506,7 +1506,8 @@ int pci_disable_link_state(struct pci_dev *pdev, int state)
>  }
>  EXPORT_SYMBOL(pci_disable_link_state);
>  
> -static int __pci_enable_link_state(struct pci_dev *pdev, int state, bool locked)
> +static int __pci_enable_link_state(struct pci_dev *pdev, int state, bool locked,
> +				   bool force)
>  {
>  	struct pcie_link_state *link = pcie_aspm_get_link(pdev);

[Severity: Critical]
This is a pre-existing issue, but does fetching the link pointer locklessly
here lead to a Use-After-Free if device removal interleaves?

If a driver fetches the pointer, then sleeps in pci_set_power_state():

__pci_enable_link_state() {
    struct pcie_link_state *link = pcie_aspm_get_link(pdev);
    ...
    if (state & PCIE_LINK_STATE_L1_SS_PCIPM) {
        pci_set_power_state(pdev, PCI_D0);
    ...
    mutex_lock(&aspm_lock);
    link->aspm_default = ...;
}

Could a concurrent hot-remove call pcie_aspm_exit_link_state(), freeing
the link structure before we acquire the aspm_lock and dereference it?

[Severity: High]
Will this function return -EPERM on systems where BIOS ACPI _OSC hasn't
granted OS ASPM control, breaking driver state restoration?

While __pci_disable_link_state() intentionally bypasses the aspm_disabled
check, __pci_enable_link_state() strictly enforces it:

__pci_enable_link_state() {
    ...
    if (aspm_disabled) {
        pci_warn(pdev, "can't override BIOS ASPM; OS doesn't have ASPM control\n");
        return -EPERM;
    }
    ...
}

If a driver attempts a supported save/disable/restore sequence on such
a system, the restore step unconditionally fails, permanently disabling ASPM.

[ ... ]
> @@ -1527,6 +1528,10 @@ static int __pci_enable_link_state(struct pci_dev *pdev, int state, bool locked)
>  		down_read(&pci_bus_sem);
>  	mutex_lock(&aspm_lock);
>  	link->aspm_default = pci_calc_aspm_enable_mask(state);
> +
> +	/* Force enable states that were previously disabled */
> +	if (force)
> +		link->aspm_disable &= ~link->aspm_default;

[Severity: High]
Does this logic neglect to clear the Clock PM disable mask?

If a driver calls pci_disable_link_state() with PCIE_LINK_STATE_CLKPM,
link->clkpm_disable is set to 1. When calling the new force-enable API
to restore the states, link->aspm_disable is cleared here, but
link->clkpm_disable remains 1.

Consequently, pcie_set_clkpm() will silently skip re-enabling Clock PM,
leading to permanent loss of clock power management.

>  	pcie_config_aspm_link(link, policy_to_aspm_state(link));

[Severity: High]
Can pci_force_enable_link_state() fail to override init-disabled ASPM
states here because link->aspm_capable remains uninitialized?

If a device was blacklisted during pcie_aspm_cap_init(), the initialization
returns early and link->aspm_capable remains 0. When pcie_config_aspm_link()
is called, it masks the requested state against link->aspm_capable:

pcie_config_aspm_link() {
    ...
    state &= link->aspm_capable;
    ...
}

Since aspm_capable is 0, the requested state becomes 0, silently failing to
enable ASPM and breaking the documented purpose of overriding the pre-1.1
device blacklist.

[ ... ]
> @@ -1576,10 +1581,36 @@ int pci_enable_link_state_locked(struct pci_dev *pdev, int state)
>  {
>  	lockdep_assert_held_read(&pci_bus_sem);
>  
> -	return __pci_enable_link_state(pdev, state, true);
> +	return __pci_enable_link_state(pdev, state, true, false);
>  }
>  EXPORT_SYMBOL(pci_enable_link_state_locked);
>  
> +/**
> + * pci_force_enable_link_state - Force enable device link state
> + * @pdev: PCI device
> + * @state: Mask of ASPM link states to enable
> + *
> + * Enable device link state, so the link will enter the specified states.
> + * Unlike pci_enable_link_state(), this also re-enables states previously
> + * disabled by pci_disable_link_state() and overrides the ASPM states disabled
> + * during init (e.g., the pre-1.1 device blacklist). The caller is therefore
> + * responsible for only enabling states the device supports, typically the ones
> + * previously reported by pcie_aspm_enabled().

[Severity: Medium]
Is it safe to advise callers to use pcie_aspm_enabled() for the state mask?

The pcie_aspm_enabled() function returns a bool, not a bitmask. If a driver
uses the return value as the state argument, the 7-bit field is truncated
to a boolean 1 or 0.

Since 1 translates to PCIE_LINK_STATE_L0S_UP (bit 0), it inadvertently
drops all other link states (like L1) the driver intended to restore.

-- 
Sashiko AI review · https://sashiko.dev/#/patchset/20260708-pci-aspm-fix-v3-0-6bd72451746e@kernel.org?part=2

  reply	other threads:[~2026-07-08 14:44 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 18+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2026-07-08 14:30 [PATCH v3 0/8] PCI/ASPM: Add pci_force_enable_link_state() API and convert Atheros drivers Manivannan Sadhasivam
2026-07-08 14:30 ` [PATCH v3 1/8] PCI/ASPM: Always disable ASPM when driver requests it Manivannan Sadhasivam
2026-07-08 14:44   ` sashiko-bot
2026-07-08 14:30 ` [PATCH v3 2/8] PCI/ASPM: Add pci_force_enable_link_state() API Manivannan Sadhasivam
2026-07-08 14:44   ` sashiko-bot [this message]
2026-07-08 14:30 ` [PATCH v3 3/8] PCI/ASPM: Transition the device to D0 (if required) when enabling ASPM link states Manivannan Sadhasivam
2026-07-08 14:50   ` sashiko-bot
2026-07-08 14:30 ` [PATCH v3 4/8] PCI/ASPM: Improve the kernel-doc for pci_{enable,disable}_link_state*() APIs Manivannan Sadhasivam
2026-07-08 14:37   ` sashiko-bot
2026-07-08 14:30 ` [PATCH v3 5/8] PCI/ASPM: Return enabled ASPM states from pcie_aspm_enabled() API Manivannan Sadhasivam
2026-07-08 14:36   ` sashiko-bot
2026-07-08 14:30 ` [PATCH v3 6/8] wifi: ath12k: Use pci_{enable/disable}_link_state() APIs to enable/disable ASPM states Manivannan Sadhasivam
2026-07-08 14:49   ` sashiko-bot
2026-07-10 20:25   ` Bjorn Helgaas
2026-07-08 14:30 ` [PATCH v3 7/8] wifi: ath11k: " Manivannan Sadhasivam
2026-07-08 14:47   ` sashiko-bot
2026-07-08 14:30 ` [PATCH v3 8/8] wifi: ath10k: " Manivannan Sadhasivam
2026-07-08 14:51   ` sashiko-bot

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=20260708144418.AF5A01F00A3D@smtp.kernel.org \
    --to=sashiko-bot@kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-pci@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mani@kernel.org \
    --cc=sashiko-reviews@lists.linux.dev \
    /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