From: Jesse Barnes <jbarnes@virtuousgeek.org>
To: Robert Hancock <hancockr@shaw.ca>
Cc: linux-kernel <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Andi Kleen <ak@suse.de>, Chuck Ebbert <cebbert@redhat.com>,
Len Brown <lenb@kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH] PCI MMCONFIG: add validation against ACPI motherboard resources
Date: Wed, 23 May 2007 17:02:30 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <200705231702.30679.jbarnes@virtuousgeek.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <4635510D.4060103@shaw.ca>
On Sunday, April 29, 2007 7:14 pm Robert Hancock wrote:
> This path adds validation of the MMCONFIG table against the ACPI
> reserved motherboard resources. If the MMCONFIG table is found to be
> reserved in ACPI, we don't bother checking the E820 table. The PCI
> Express firmware spec apparently tells BIOS developers that
> reservation in ACPI is required and E820 reservation is optional, so
> checking against ACPI first makes sense. Many BIOSes don't reserve
> the MMCONFIG region in E820 even though it is perfectly functional,
> the existing check needlessly disables MMCONFIG in these cases.
>
> In order to do this, MMCONFIG setup has been split into two phases.
> If PCI configuration type 1 is not available (like on EFI Macs) then
> MMCONFIG is enabled early as before. Otherwise, it is enabled later
> after the ACPI interpreter is enabled, since we need to be able to
> execute control methods in order to check the ACPI reserved
> resources. Presently this is just triggered off the end of ACPI
> interpreter initialization.
>
> There are a few other behavioral changes here:
>
> -Validate all MMCONFIG configurations provided, not just the first
> one.
>
> -Validate the entire required length of each configuration according
> to the provided ending bus number is reserved, not just the minimum
> required allocation.
>
> -Validate that the area is reserved even if we read it from the
> chipset directly and not from the MCFG table. This catches the case
> where the BIOS didn't set the location properly in the chipset and
> has mapped it over other things it shouldn't have. This might be
> overly pessimistic - we might be able to instead verify that no other
> reserved resources (like chipset registers) are inside this memory
> range.
>
> Some testing is needed to see if this rejects MMCONFIG on all systems
> where it is problematic. There were some patches floating around to
> read the table location out of the chipset for Intel 915 and 965, I
> think the author found the latter to be problematic since the chipset
> had the table mapped over top of motherboard resources. The extra
> checking here may catch that case if we add that chipset-specific
> support.
>
> Applies to 2.6.21.1.
>
> Signed-off-by: Robert Hancock <hancockr@shaw.ca>
Acked-by: Jesse Barnes <jesse.barnes@intel.com>
As long as we get a fix for the mmconfig based probing issues in the
other thread, I think this patch should go in. Robert, maybe you could
submit it along with this one (and an i386 equivalent)? Type 1 config
access is already a fallback for mmconfig for x86_64 at least, so it
should be safe for non-extended access too, and it avoids problems with
our lack of decode disable in the generic PCI probing code.
Signed-off-by: Jesse Barnes <jesse.barnes@intel.com>
diff --git a/arch/x86_64/pci/mmconfig.c b/arch/x86_64/pci/mmconfig.c
index 65d8273..5052f80 100644
--- a/arch/x86_64/pci/mmconfig.c
+++ b/arch/x86_64/pci/mmconfig.c
@@ -61,7 +61,7 @@ static int pci_mmcfg_read(unsigned int seg, unsigned
int bus,
}
addr = pci_dev_base(seg, bus, devfn);
- if (!addr)
+ if (!addr || reg < 256) /* Use type 1 for non-extended access */
return pci_conf1_read(seg,bus,devfn,reg,len,value);
switch (len) {
@@ -89,7 +89,7 @@ static int pci_mmcfg_write(unsigned int seg, unsigned
int bus,
return -EINVAL;
addr = pci_dev_base(seg, bus, devfn);
- if (!addr)
+ if (!addr || reg < 256) /* Use type 1 for non-extended access */
return pci_conf1_write(seg,bus,devfn,reg,len,value);
switch (len) {
prev parent reply other threads:[~2007-05-24 0:05 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 61+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2007-04-30 2:14 [RFC PATCH] PCI MMCONFIG: add validation against ACPI motherboard resources Robert Hancock
2007-04-30 2:59 ` Randy Dunlap
2007-04-30 22:59 ` Olivier Galibert
2007-04-30 23:26 ` Robert Hancock
2007-05-01 16:48 ` Jesse Barnes
2007-05-02 2:41 ` Jesse Barnes
2007-05-02 2:56 ` Jesse Barnes
2007-05-02 5:27 ` Jesse Barnes
2007-05-02 14:34 ` Robert Hancock
2007-05-02 17:57 ` Jesse Barnes
2007-05-02 23:45 ` Robert Hancock
2007-05-02 23:54 ` Jesse Barnes
2007-05-04 21:06 ` Jesse Barnes
2007-05-05 0:22 ` Robert Hancock
2007-05-21 19:10 ` Jesse Barnes
2007-05-21 19:26 ` Robert Hancock
2007-05-21 20:07 ` Jesse Barnes
2007-05-21 20:22 ` Jesse Barnes
2007-05-23 0:31 ` Robert Hancock
2007-05-23 0:38 ` Jesse Barnes
2007-05-23 0:53 ` Robert Hancock
2007-05-23 0:56 ` Jesse Barnes
2007-05-23 1:06 ` Robert Hancock
2007-05-23 18:52 ` Jesse Barnes
2007-05-23 20:20 ` Linus Torvalds
2007-05-23 20:38 ` Alan Cox
2007-05-23 20:45 ` Linus Torvalds
2007-05-23 20:49 ` Jesse Barnes
2007-05-23 20:56 ` Linus Torvalds
2007-05-23 21:03 ` Jesse Barnes
2007-05-23 21:09 ` Jeff Garzik
2007-05-23 21:35 ` Alan Cox
2007-05-23 21:35 ` Jeff Garzik
2007-05-23 21:37 ` Jesse Barnes
2007-05-23 21:42 ` Jeff Garzik
2007-05-23 23:07 ` Stephen Hemminger
2007-05-23 21:54 ` Linus Torvalds
2007-05-23 22:06 ` Jesse Barnes
2007-05-23 22:16 ` Linus Torvalds
2007-05-23 22:28 ` Jesse Barnes
2007-05-23 23:04 ` David Miller
2007-05-23 23:11 ` Jesse Barnes
2007-05-23 23:15 ` Robert Hancock
2007-05-23 23:21 ` Jesse Barnes
2007-05-23 21:20 ` Jesse Barnes
2007-05-23 22:24 ` Olivier Galibert
2007-05-23 22:31 ` Jesse Barnes
2007-05-23 22:48 ` Linus Torvalds
2007-05-23 22:55 ` Jesse Barnes
2007-05-24 0:21 ` Linus Torvalds
2007-05-24 2:59 ` Jesse Barnes
2007-05-24 3:18 ` Linus Torvalds
2007-05-24 3:20 ` Linus Torvalds
2007-05-24 3:40 ` Jesse Barnes
2007-05-24 5:19 ` Robert Hancock
2007-05-24 6:18 ` Jeff Garzik
2007-05-24 15:42 ` Linus Torvalds
2007-05-23 23:04 ` Robert Hancock
2007-05-23 23:04 ` Robert Hancock
2007-05-23 23:06 ` Jesse Barnes
2007-05-24 0:02 ` Jesse Barnes [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=200705231702.30679.jbarnes@virtuousgeek.org \
--to=jbarnes@virtuousgeek.org \
--cc=ak@suse.de \
--cc=cebbert@redhat.com \
--cc=hancockr@shaw.ca \
--cc=lenb@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
/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