Linux PCI subsystem development
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "Ilpo Järvinen" <ilpo.jarvinen@linux.intel.com>
To: sashiko-reviews@lists.linux.dev
Cc: linux-pci@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 7/7] PCI/quirks: Avoid certain address on Genoa systems
Date: Fri, 2 Oct 2026 16:47:54 +0300 (EEST)	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <27be560c-4b69-bc39-f362-bd77b217d7c5@linux.intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20261002114833.679371F000FF@smtp.kernel.org>

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 3111 bytes --]

On Fri, 2 Oct 2026, sashiko-bot@kernel.org wrote:

> Thank you for your contribution! Sashiko AI review found 1 potential issue(s) to consider:
> - [High] pci/quirks: skipped workaround and UAF on rescan due to dangling resource pointer
> --
> 
> commit 988b9fe1c0d1202ac7629ed0f5250a0381f61b90
> Author: Ilpo Järvinen <ilpo.jarvinen@linux.intel.com>
> 
> PCI/quirks: Avoid certain address on Genoa systems
> 
> This commit addresses a 64kB iomem black hole on Genoa systems that causes
> reads to return ~0 and blocks overlapping BARs from working. It reserves the
> problematic space via a bridge quirk.
> 
> Closes: https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=222074
> 
> > diff --git a/drivers/pci/quirks.c b/drivers/pci/quirks.c
> > index de9bbccda21fd..5483b47d8d544 100644
> > --- a/drivers/pci/quirks.c
> > +++ b/drivers/pci/quirks.c
> 
> [ ... ]
> 
> > +static struct resource black_hole_res = DEFINE_RES_MEM_NAMED(0x9c000000, SZ_64K,
> > +							     "reserved");
> > +
> > +static void genoa_iomem_black_hole(struct pci_dev *dev)
> > +{
> > +	struct resource *r;
> > +
> > +	pci_bus_for_each_resource(dev->bus, r) {
> > +		if (!r || !r->flags || !resource_assigned(r))
> > +			continue;
> > +
> > +		if (!__resource_contains_unbound(r, &black_hole_res))
> > +			continue;
> > +
> > +		if (resource_assigned(&black_hole_res))
> > +			pci_dbg(dev, "iomem black hole workaround already applied\n");
> 
> [Severity: High]
> Can this lead to a use-after-free and cause the workaround to be skipped on
> rescan?
> 
> During the first probe, insert_resource() sets black_hole_res.parent to the
> dynamically allocated host bridge window. If the PCI bridge is subsequently
> removed, the bridge's resources are released and freed.
> 
> However, release_resource() unlinks the parent but does not clear the parent
> pointers of child resources. Because black_hole_res is statically allocated,
> its parent pointer is left dangling.
>
> When the bus is rescanned, resource_assigned(&black_hole_res) evaluates to
> true due to the dangling parent pointer. The code erroneously logs "already
> applied" and skips inserting the reservation into the new bridge window.
>
> This leaves the new window unprotected, allowing subsequent BAR allocations
> to fall into the 0x9c000000 black hole.

Before sending this, I did test removing the PCI devices all the way to 
the Root Complex (RC included) and the black hole marker weathered the 
storm just fine.

I suppose if I'd proceed removing something from further up (something 
ACPI side?), the scenario might actually occur but why would anyone want 
to do that?

I think this goes to the territory where root has many ways to shoot 
oneself's own foot...

-- 
 i.
 
> > +		else if (!insert_resource(r, &black_hole_res))
> > +			pci_info(dev, "iomem black hole workaround enabled\n");
> > +		else
> > +			pci_dbg(dev, "iomem black hole workaround add failed\n");
> > +		return;
> > +	}
> > +}
> > +DECLARE_PCI_FIXUP_HEADER(PCI_VENDOR_ID_AMD, 0x14ab, genoa_iomem_black_hole);
> 
> 

  reply	other threads:[~2026-10-02 13:48 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 21+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2026-10-02 11:33 [PATCH v2 0/7] PCI: Resource placement algorithm fixes Ilpo Järvinen
2026-10-02 11:33 ` [PATCH v2 1/7] resource: Mark free space assigned Ilpo Järvinen
2026-10-02 11:43   ` sashiko-bot
2026-10-02 11:33 ` [PATCH v2 2/7] PCI/parisc: Clean up resource debug print & use dynamic debug Ilpo Järvinen
2026-10-02 11:43   ` sashiko-bot
2026-10-02 11:33 ` [PATCH v2 3/7] PCI: Honor alignment overrides Ilpo Järvinen
2026-10-02 11:46   ` Jani Nikula
2026-10-02 11:49   ` sashiko-bot
2026-10-02 11:33 ` [PATCH v2 4/7] PCI: Fix nesting windows with remainder at the left edge Ilpo Järvinen
2026-10-02 11:42   ` sashiko-bot
2026-10-02 11:33 ` [PATCH v2 5/7] PCI: Place resources to either edge of the window Ilpo Järvinen
2026-10-02 11:46   ` sashiko-bot
2026-10-02 11:33 ` [PATCH v2 6/7] PCI: Fix composite resource sizing Ilpo Järvinen
2026-10-02 11:51   ` sashiko-bot
2026-10-02 11:33 ` [PATCH v2 7/7] PCI/quirks: Avoid certain address on Genoa systems Ilpo Järvinen
2026-10-02 11:48   ` sashiko-bot
2026-10-02 13:47     ` Ilpo Järvinen [this message]
2026-10-02 13:12   ` Mario Limonciello
2026-10-04 15:44   ` Borislav Petkov
2026-10-05 18:47   ` Bjorn Helgaas
2026-10-06 12:02     ` Ilpo Järvinen

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=27be560c-4b69-bc39-f362-bd77b217d7c5@linux.intel.com \
    --to=ilpo.jarvinen@linux.intel.com \
    --cc=linux-pci@vger.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