From: Tomasz Nowicki <tomasz.nowicki@linaro.org>
To: Jiang Liu <jiang.liu@linux.intel.com>, Tomasz Nowicki <tn@semihalf.com>
Cc: "Rafael J . Wysocki" <rjw@rjwysocki.net>,
Bjorn Helgaas <bhelgaas@google.com>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>,
Boszormenyi Zoltan <zboszor@pr.hu>, Len Brown <lenb@kernel.org>,
LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
linux-pci@vger.kernel.org, linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org,
"x86 @ kernel . org" <x86@kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [Bugfix v4] PCI, ACPI: Fix regressions caused by resource_size_t overflow with 32-bit kernel
Date: Thu, 5 Nov 2015 14:53:38 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <563B5F62.7040102@linaro.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <563B588C.1010507@linux.intel.com>
On 05.11.2015 14:24, Jiang Liu wrote:
> On 2015/11/5 20:53, Tomasz Nowicki wrote:
>> On 02.11.2015 16:27, Tomasz Nowicki wrote:
>>> On 08.07.2015 09:26, Jiang Liu wrote:
>>>> Zoltan Boszormenyi reported this regression:
>>>> "There's a Realtek RTL8111/8168/8411 (PCI ID 10ec:8168, Subsystem ID
>>>> 1565:230e) network chip on the mainboard. After the r8169 driver
>>>> loaded
>>>> the IRQs in the machine went berserk. Keyboard keypressed arrived
>>>> with
>>>> considerable latency and duplicated, so no real work was possible.
>>>> The machine responded to the power button but didn't actually power
>>>> down. It just stuck at the powering down message. I had to press the
>>>> power button for 4 seconds to power it down.
>>>>
>>>> The computer is a POS machine with a big battery inside. Because
>>>> of this,
>>>> either ACPI or the Realtek chip kept the bad state and after
>>>> rebooting,
>>>> the network chip didn't even show up in lspci. Not even the PXE ROM
>>>> announced itself during boot. I had to disconnect the battery to
>>>> beat
>>>> some sense back to the computer.
>>>>
>>>> The regression happens with 4.0.5, 4.1.0-rc8 and 4.1.0-final.
>>>> 3.18.16 was
>>>> good."
>>>>
>>>> The regression is caused by commit 593669c2ac0f ("x86/PCI/ACPI: Use
>>>> common
>>>> ACPI resource interfaces to simplify implementation"). Since commit
>>>> 593669c2ac0f, x86 PCI ACPI host bridge driver validates ACPI
>>>> resources by
>>>> first converting an ACPI resource to a 'struct resource' structure and
>>>> then applying checks against the converted resource structure. The
>>>> 'start'
>>>> and 'end' fields in 'struct resource' are defined to be type of
>>>> resource_size_t, which may be 32 bits or 64 bits depending on
>>>> CONFIG_PHYS_ADDR_T_64BIT.
>>>>
>>>> This may cause incorrect resource validation results with 32-bit kernels
>>>> because 64-bit ACPI resource descriptors may get truncated when
>>>> converting
>>>> to 32-bit 'start' and 'end' fields in 'struct resource'. It eventually
>>>> affects PCI resource allocation subsystem and makes some PCI devices and
>>>> the system behave abnormally due to incorrect resource assignment.
>>>>
>>>> So enhance the ACPI resource parsing interfaces to ignore ACPI resource
>>>> descriptors with address/offset above 4G when running in 32-bit mode.
>>>>
>>>> With the fix applied, the behavior of the machine was restored to how
>>>> 3.18.16 worked, i.e. the memory range that is over 4GB is ignored again,
>>>> and lspci -vvxxx shows that everything is at the same memory window as
>>>> they were with 3.18.16.
>>>>
>>>> Reported-and-Tested-by: Boszormenyi Zoltan <zboszor@pr.hu>
>>>> Fixes: 593669c2ac0f ("x86/PCI/ACPI: Use common ACPI resource
>>>> interfaces to simplify implementation")
>>>> Signed-off-by: Jiang Liu <jiang.liu@linux.intel.com>
>>>> Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org # 4.0
>>>> ---
>>>> drivers/acpi/resource.c | 24 +++++++++++++++---------
>>>> 1 file changed, 15 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-)
>>>>
>>>> diff --git a/drivers/acpi/resource.c b/drivers/acpi/resource.c
>>>> index 10561ce16ed1..e8d281739cbc 100644
>>>> --- a/drivers/acpi/resource.c
>>>> +++ b/drivers/acpi/resource.c
>>>> @@ -194,6 +194,7 @@ static bool acpi_decode_space(struct resource_win
>>>> *win,
>>>> u8 iodec = attr->granularity == 0xfff ? ACPI_DECODE_10 :
>>>> ACPI_DECODE_16;
>>>> bool wp = addr->info.mem.write_protect;
>>>> u64 len = attr->address_length;
>>>> + u64 start, end, offset = 0;
>>>> struct resource *res = &win->res;
>>>>
>>>> /*
>>>> @@ -205,9 +206,6 @@ static bool acpi_decode_space(struct resource_win
>>>> *win,
>>>> pr_debug("ACPI: Invalid address space min_addr_fix %d,
>>>> max_addr_fix %d, len %llx\n",
>>>> addr->min_address_fixed, addr->max_address_fixed, len);
>>>>
>>>> - res->start = attr->minimum;
>>>> - res->end = attr->maximum;
>>>> -
>>>> /*
>>>> * For bridges that translate addresses across the bridge,
>>>> * translation_offset is the offset that must be added to the
>>>> @@ -215,12 +213,22 @@ static bool acpi_decode_space(struct
>>>> resource_win *win,
>>>> * primary side. Non-bridge devices must list 0 for all Address
>>>> * Translation offset bits.
>>>> */
>>>> - if (addr->producer_consumer == ACPI_PRODUCER) {
>>>> - res->start += attr->translation_offset;
>>>> - res->end += attr->translation_offset;
>>>> - } else if (attr->translation_offset) {
>>>> + if (addr->producer_consumer == ACPI_PRODUCER)
>>>> + offset = attr->translation_offset;
>>>> + else if (attr->translation_offset)
>>>> pr_debug("ACPI: translation_offset(%lld) is invalid for
>>>> non-bridge device.\n",
>>>> attr->translation_offset);
>>>> + start = attr->minimum + offset;
>>>> + end = attr->maximum + offset;
>>>
>>> I still see the issue for this area, I mean ACPI_IO_RANGE. You are
>>> adding translation offset to attr->minimum, build resource structure
>>> which is then passed to acpi_dev_ioresource_flags and compared against
>>> 0x10003. It causes some IO ranges to be ignored.
>>>
>>
>> Kindly reminder, any comments?
>>
>> Tomasz
> Hi Tomasz,
> Thanks for reporting this issue! Could you please help to
> test the attached patch?
I was not able to apply your patch directly but that part:
- if (res->end >= 0x10003)
+ if (res->end - offset >= 0x10003)
res->flags |= IORESOURCE_DISABLED | IORESOURCE_UNSET;
definitely helps. Thanks!
Tomasz
prev parent reply other threads:[~2015-11-05 13:53 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 16+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2015-06-24 7:43 [Bugfix v2] PCI, ACPI: Fix regressions caused by resource_size_t overflow with 32bit kernel Jiang Liu
2015-06-24 8:25 ` Boszormenyi Zoltan
2015-06-24 11:00 ` Boszormenyi Zoltan
2015-06-24 8:30 ` Ingo Molnar
2015-06-24 9:28 ` Boszormenyi Zoltan
2015-06-24 9:49 ` Ingo Molnar
2015-06-24 10:17 ` [Bugfix v3] PCI, ACPI: Fix regressions caused by resource_size_t overflow with 32-bit kernel Jiang Liu
2015-06-24 10:18 ` Ingo Molnar
2015-06-29 8:55 ` Boszormenyi Zoltan
2015-06-29 14:28 ` Jiang Liu
2015-07-08 7:26 ` [Bugfix v4] " Jiang Liu
2015-07-10 1:10 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2015-11-02 15:27 ` Tomasz Nowicki
2015-11-05 12:53 ` Tomasz Nowicki
2015-11-05 13:24 ` Jiang Liu
2015-11-05 13:53 ` Tomasz Nowicki [this message]
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=563B5F62.7040102@linaro.org \
--to=tomasz.nowicki@linaro.org \
--cc=bhelgaas@google.com \
--cc=jiang.liu@linux.intel.com \
--cc=lenb@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-pci@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@kernel.org \
--cc=rjw@rjwysocki.net \
--cc=tn@semihalf.com \
--cc=x86@kernel.org \
--cc=zboszor@pr.hu \
/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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).