* [PATCH v3 0/2] x86/amd_node: Fixes for virtualized systems
@ 2026-08-25 21:48 Jason Andryuk
2026-08-25 21:48 ` [PATCH v3 1/2] x86/amd_node: Avoid divide by zero on " Jason Andryuk
2026-08-25 21:48 ` [PATCH v3 2/2] x86/amd_node: Remove smn_exclusive Jason Andryuk
0 siblings, 2 replies; 11+ messages in thread
From: Jason Andryuk @ 2026-08-25 21:48 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Borislav Petkov, Dave Hansen, H. Peter Anvin, Ingo Molnar,
Mario Limonciello, Thomas Gleixner, x86, Yazen Ghannam
Cc: Jason Andryuk, linux-kernel, Penny Zheng
For v3, Add newline to warning. R-b Yazen.
For v2, swap the patch order.
On my test system, I see SMN accesses from:
amd_pmf_probe() - read
amd_pmc_probe() - read
acp_acp70_audio_probe() - write
Jason Andryuk (2):
x86/amd_node: Avoid divide by zero on virtualized systems
x86/amd_node: Remove smn_exclusive
arch/x86/kernel/amd_node.c | 18 ++++++++++++------
1 file changed, 12 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
--
2.55.0
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 11+ messages in thread
* [PATCH v3 1/2] x86/amd_node: Avoid divide by zero on virtualized systems
2026-08-25 21:48 [PATCH v3 0/2] x86/amd_node: Fixes for virtualized systems Jason Andryuk
@ 2026-08-25 21:48 ` Jason Andryuk
2026-08-26 4:45 ` Borislav Petkov
2026-08-31 17:35 ` [tip: x86/urgent] " tip-bot2 for Jason Andryuk
2026-08-25 21:48 ` [PATCH v3 2/2] x86/amd_node: Remove smn_exclusive Jason Andryuk
1 sibling, 2 replies; 11+ messages in thread
From: Jason Andryuk @ 2026-08-25 21:48 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Borislav Petkov, Dave Hansen, H. Peter Anvin, Ingo Molnar,
Mario Limonciello, Thomas Gleixner, x86, Yazen Ghannam
Cc: Jason Andryuk, linux-kernel, Penny Zheng, stable
On a virtualized system, the number of nodes does not have a
relationship to the number of roots. A Xen PVH dom0 can calculate
roots_per_node as 0, which crashes with a divide by zero in:
if (count++ % roots_per_node)
The issue is seen with Xen, but it could affect other systems.
Change roots_per_node == 0 to 1 to allow the system to boot. Print a
warning when this is performed for non-virtualized systems.
Fixes: 0a4b61d9c2e4 ("x86/amd_node: Fix AMD root device caching")
Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org
Suggested-by: Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de>
Reviewed-by: Yazen Ghannam <yazen.ghannam@amd.com>
Signed-off-by: Jason Andryuk <jason.andryuk@amd.com>
---
v3:
Add newline to warning.
R-b: Yazen
v2:
Print as a warning instead of error
Use "!" instead of "== 0".
X86_FEATURE_XENPV is only for PV, but this is observed with a PVH dom0.
---
arch/x86/kernel/amd_node.c | 5 +++++
1 file changed, 5 insertions(+)
diff --git a/arch/x86/kernel/amd_node.c b/arch/x86/kernel/amd_node.c
index 0be01725a2a4..408b9fd48349 100644
--- a/arch/x86/kernel/amd_node.c
+++ b/arch/x86/kernel/amd_node.c
@@ -287,6 +287,11 @@ static int __init amd_smn_init(void)
return -ENOMEM;
roots_per_node = num_roots / num_nodes;
+ if (!roots_per_node) {
+ if (!cpu_feature_enabled(X86_FEATURE_HYPERVISOR))
+ pr_warn(FW_BUG "Error detecting roots per node.\n");
+ roots_per_node = 1;
+ }
count = 0;
node = 0;
--
2.55.0
^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 11+ messages in thread
* [PATCH v3 2/2] x86/amd_node: Remove smn_exclusive
2026-08-25 21:48 [PATCH v3 0/2] x86/amd_node: Fixes for virtualized systems Jason Andryuk
2026-08-25 21:48 ` [PATCH v3 1/2] x86/amd_node: Avoid divide by zero on " Jason Andryuk
@ 2026-08-25 21:48 ` Jason Andryuk
2026-08-31 2:30 ` Borislav Petkov
1 sibling, 1 reply; 11+ messages in thread
From: Jason Andryuk @ 2026-08-25 21:48 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Borislav Petkov, Dave Hansen, H. Peter Anvin, Ingo Molnar,
Mario Limonciello, Thomas Gleixner, x86, Yazen Ghannam
Cc: Jason Andryuk, linux-kernel, Penny Zheng, stable,
Mario Limonciello (AMD)
amd_smn_read/write() are exported functions around __amd_smn_rw(), so
they are always available even if amd_smn_init() fails. smn_exclusive
would prevent access to __amd_smn_rw(), but it is placed too late. If
amd_smn_init() failed, amd_roots is NULL and __amd_smn_rw() will fault
over it. Replace smn_exclusive with directly checking amd_roots to
avoid the NULL pointer dereference.
commit 83518453074d ("x86/amd_node: Add SMN offsets to exclusive region
access") added smn_exclusive which indicated the calls to
pci_request_config_region_exclusive() succeeded to prevent userspace
access.
commit 0a4b61d9c2e4 ("x86/amd_node: Fix AMD root device caching")
re-ordered initialization so pci_request_config_region_exclusive() is
called earlier and a failure exits amd_smn_init() before allocating
amd_roots. Setting smn_exclusive moved to the end of amd_smn_init(),
after amd_roots is allocated. smn_exclusive became redundant to
amd_roots and can be removed.
Add a comment stating how amd_roots replaces smn_exclusive's purpose.
Fixes: 77466b798d59 ("x86/amd_node: Remove dependency on AMD_NB")
Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org
Reviewed-by: Yazen Ghannam <yazen.ghannam@amd.com>
Reviewed-by: Mario Limonciello (AMD) <superm1@kernel.org>
Signed-off-by: Jason Andryuk <jason.andryuk@amd.com>
---
Fixes is the introduction of amd_roots, which could be a NULL deref.
v3:
No change
v2:
R-b Yazen and Mario
Add comment about amd_root taking smn_exclusive's purpose to indicate
userspace access is prevented.
Expand commit message
---
arch/x86/kernel/amd_node.c | 13 +++++++------
1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
diff --git a/arch/x86/kernel/amd_node.c b/arch/x86/kernel/amd_node.c
index 408b9fd48349..833e5eda5d91 100644
--- a/arch/x86/kernel/amd_node.c
+++ b/arch/x86/kernel/amd_node.c
@@ -38,7 +38,6 @@ static struct pci_dev **amd_roots;
/* Protect the PCI config register pairs used for SMN. */
static DEFINE_MUTEX(smn_mutex);
-static bool smn_exclusive;
#define SMN_INDEX_OFFSET 0x60
#define SMN_DATA_OFFSET 0x64
@@ -91,11 +90,15 @@ static int __amd_smn_rw(u8 i_off, u8 d_off, u16 node, u32 address, u32 *value, b
if (node >= amd_num_nodes())
return err;
- root = amd_roots[node];
- if (!root)
+ /*
+ * non-NULL amd_roots indicates pci_request_config_region_exclusive()
+ * succeeded and userspace cannot access the registers.
+ */
+ if (!amd_roots)
return err;
- if (!smn_exclusive)
+ root = amd_roots[node];
+ if (!root)
return err;
guard(mutex)(&smn_mutex);
@@ -313,8 +316,6 @@ static int __init amd_smn_init(void)
debugfs_create_file("value", 0600, debugfs_dir, NULL, &smn_value_fops);
}
- smn_exclusive = true;
-
return 0;
}
--
2.55.0
^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 11+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH v3 1/2] x86/amd_node: Avoid divide by zero on virtualized systems
2026-08-25 21:48 ` [PATCH v3 1/2] x86/amd_node: Avoid divide by zero on " Jason Andryuk
@ 2026-08-26 4:45 ` Borislav Petkov
2026-08-26 12:15 ` Jason Andryuk
2026-08-31 17:35 ` [tip: x86/urgent] " tip-bot2 for Jason Andryuk
1 sibling, 1 reply; 11+ messages in thread
From: Borislav Petkov @ 2026-08-26 4:45 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Jason Andryuk
Cc: Dave Hansen, H. Peter Anvin, Ingo Molnar, Mario Limonciello,
Thomas Gleixner, x86, Yazen Ghannam, linux-kernel, Penny Zheng,
stable
On Tue, Aug 25, 2026 at 05:48:02PM -0400, Jason Andryuk wrote:
> On a virtualized system, the number of nodes does not have a
> relationship to the number of roots. A Xen PVH dom0 can calculate
> roots_per_node as 0, which crashes with a divide by zero in:
>
> if (count++ % roots_per_node)
>
> The issue is seen with Xen, but it could affect other systems.
>
> Change roots_per_node == 0 to 1 to allow the system to boot. Print a
> warning when this is performed for non-virtualized systems.
>
> Fixes: 0a4b61d9c2e4 ("x86/amd_node: Fix AMD root device caching")
> Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org
> Suggested-by: Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de>
> Reviewed-by: Yazen Ghannam <yazen.ghannam@amd.com>
> Signed-off-by: Jason Andryuk <jason.andryuk@amd.com>
> ---
> v3:
> Add newline to warning.
> R-b: Yazen
>
> v2:
> Print as a warning instead of error
> Use "!" instead of "== 0".
>
> X86_FEATURE_XENPV is only for PV, but this is observed with a PVH dom0.
> ---
> arch/x86/kernel/amd_node.c | 5 +++++
> 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/arch/x86/kernel/amd_node.c b/arch/x86/kernel/amd_node.c
> index 0be01725a2a4..408b9fd48349 100644
> --- a/arch/x86/kernel/amd_node.c
> +++ b/arch/x86/kernel/amd_node.c
> @@ -287,6 +287,11 @@ static int __init amd_smn_init(void)
> return -ENOMEM;
>
> roots_per_node = num_roots / num_nodes;
Hold on - the only way this is fixing something on Xen - and you say that
roots_per_node becomes 0 - which means that num_roots is 0.
But a couple of lines above, we have
if (!num_roots)
return -ENODEV;
So we would've exited already.
num_nodes can't be 0 because you'd explode even with this patch.
What am I missing?
Thx.
--
Regards/Gruss,
Boris.
https://people.kernel.org/tglx/notes-about-netiquette
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 11+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH v3 1/2] x86/amd_node: Avoid divide by zero on virtualized systems
2026-08-26 4:45 ` Borislav Petkov
@ 2026-08-26 12:15 ` Jason Andryuk
2026-08-26 15:55 ` Borislav Petkov
0 siblings, 1 reply; 11+ messages in thread
From: Jason Andryuk @ 2026-08-26 12:15 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Borislav Petkov
Cc: Dave Hansen, H. Peter Anvin, Ingo Molnar, Mario Limonciello,
Thomas Gleixner, x86, Yazen Ghannam, linux-kernel, Penny Zheng,
stable
On 2026-08-26 00:45, Borislav Petkov wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 25, 2026 at 05:48:02PM -0400, Jason Andryuk wrote:
>> On a virtualized system, the number of nodes does not have a
>> relationship to the number of roots. A Xen PVH dom0 can calculate
>> roots_per_node as 0, which crashes with a divide by zero in:
>>
>> if (count++ % roots_per_node)
>>
>> The issue is seen with Xen, but it could affect other systems.
>>
>> Change roots_per_node == 0 to 1 to allow the system to boot. Print a
>> warning when this is performed for non-virtualized systems.
>>
>> Fixes: 0a4b61d9c2e4 ("x86/amd_node: Fix AMD root device caching")
>> Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org
>> Suggested-by: Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de>
>> Reviewed-by: Yazen Ghannam <yazen.ghannam@amd.com>
>> Signed-off-by: Jason Andryuk <jason.andryuk@amd.com>
>> ---
>> v3:
>> Add newline to warning.
>> R-b: Yazen
>>
>> v2:
>> Print as a warning instead of error
>> Use "!" instead of "== 0".
>>
>> X86_FEATURE_XENPV is only for PV, but this is observed with a PVH dom0.
>> ---
>> arch/x86/kernel/amd_node.c | 5 +++++
>> 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+)
>>
>> diff --git a/arch/x86/kernel/amd_node.c b/arch/x86/kernel/amd_node.c
>> index 0be01725a2a4..408b9fd48349 100644
>> --- a/arch/x86/kernel/amd_node.c
>> +++ b/arch/x86/kernel/amd_node.c
>> @@ -287,6 +287,11 @@ static int __init amd_smn_init(void)
>> return -ENOMEM;
>>
>> roots_per_node = num_roots / num_nodes;
>
> Hold on - the only way this is fixing something on Xen - and you say that
> roots_per_node becomes 0 - which means that num_roots is 0.
>
> But a couple of lines above, we have
>
> if (!num_roots)
> return -ENODEV;
>
> So we would've exited already.
>
> num_nodes can't be 0 because you'd explode even with this patch.
>
> What am I missing?
num_roots is 1, but num_nodes is 2. Integer division gives 0 for
roots_per_node.
Regards,
Jason
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 11+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH v3 1/2] x86/amd_node: Avoid divide by zero on virtualized systems
2026-08-26 12:15 ` Jason Andryuk
@ 2026-08-26 15:55 ` Borislav Petkov
0 siblings, 0 replies; 11+ messages in thread
From: Borislav Petkov @ 2026-08-26 15:55 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Jason Andryuk
Cc: Dave Hansen, H. Peter Anvin, Ingo Molnar, Mario Limonciello,
Thomas Gleixner, x86, Yazen Ghannam, linux-kernel, Penny Zheng,
stable
On Wed, Aug 26, 2026 at 08:15:49AM -0400, Jason Andryuk wrote:
> num_roots is 1, but num_nodes is 2. Integer division gives 0 for
> roots_per_node.
Aha, Xen has some topology knowledge and it manages to produce 2 nodes.
I'll add that to the commit message.
Thx.
--
Regards/Gruss,
Boris.
https://people.kernel.org/tglx/notes-about-netiquette
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 11+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH v3 2/2] x86/amd_node: Remove smn_exclusive
2026-08-25 21:48 ` [PATCH v3 2/2] x86/amd_node: Remove smn_exclusive Jason Andryuk
@ 2026-08-31 2:30 ` Borislav Petkov
2026-08-31 17:52 ` Jason Andryuk
0 siblings, 1 reply; 11+ messages in thread
From: Borislav Petkov @ 2026-08-31 2:30 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Jason Andryuk
Cc: Dave Hansen, H. Peter Anvin, Ingo Molnar, Mario Limonciello,
Thomas Gleixner, x86, Yazen Ghannam, linux-kernel, Penny Zheng,
stable, Mario Limonciello (AMD)
On Tue, Aug 25, 2026 at 05:48:03PM -0400, Jason Andryuk wrote:
> - root = amd_roots[node];
> - if (!root)
> + /*
> + * non-NULL amd_roots indicates pci_request_config_region_exclusive()
> + * succeeded and userspace cannot access the registers.
> + */
> + if (!amd_roots)
So then this should be
if (amd_roots)
return err;
?
--
Regards/Gruss,
Boris.
https://people.kernel.org/tglx/notes-about-netiquette
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 11+ messages in thread
* [tip: x86/urgent] x86/amd_node: Avoid divide by zero on virtualized systems
2026-08-25 21:48 ` [PATCH v3 1/2] x86/amd_node: Avoid divide by zero on " Jason Andryuk
2026-08-26 4:45 ` Borislav Petkov
@ 2026-08-31 17:35 ` tip-bot2 for Jason Andryuk
1 sibling, 0 replies; 11+ messages in thread
From: tip-bot2 for Jason Andryuk @ 2026-08-31 17:35 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: linux-tip-commits
Cc: Borislav Petkov, Jason Andryuk, Yazen Ghannam, stable, x86,
linux-kernel
The following commit has been merged into the x86/urgent branch of tip:
Commit-ID: 72bd92bd8190d7869ecb462649ca40f297822a33
Gitweb: https://git.kernel.org/tip/72bd92bd8190d7869ecb462649ca40f297822a33
Author: Jason Andryuk <jason.andryuk@amd.com>
AuthorDate: Tue, 25 Aug 2026 17:48:02 -04:00
Committer: Borislav Petkov (AMD) <bp@alien8.de>
CommitterDate: Sun, 30 Aug 2026 18:25:42 -07:00
x86/amd_node: Avoid divide by zero on virtualized systems
On a virtualized system, the number of nodes does not have a relationship to
the number of roots. A Xen PVH dom0 can calculate roots_per_node as 0, which
crashes with a divide by zero in:
if (count++ % roots_per_node)
because the underlying topology code on Xen ends up making num_nodes
2 and num_roots 1 and the integer division result is 0.
The issue is seen with Xen, but it could affect other systems.
Set roots_per_node to 1 in this case. Print a firmware bug when this is
performed for non-virtualized systems.
[ bp: Massage commit message. ]
Fixes: 0a4b61d9c2e4 ("x86/amd_node: Fix AMD root device caching")
Suggested-by: Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de>
Signed-off-by: Jason Andryuk <jason.andryuk@amd.com>
Signed-off-by: Borislav Petkov (AMD) <bp@alien8.de>
Reviewed-by: Yazen Ghannam <yazen.ghannam@amd.com>
Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org
Link: https://patch.msgid.link/20260825214805.39148-2-jason.andryuk@amd.com
---
arch/x86/kernel/amd_node.c | 5 +++++
1 file changed, 5 insertions(+)
diff --git a/arch/x86/kernel/amd_node.c b/arch/x86/kernel/amd_node.c
index 0be0172..408b9fd 100644
--- a/arch/x86/kernel/amd_node.c
+++ b/arch/x86/kernel/amd_node.c
@@ -287,6 +287,11 @@ static int __init amd_smn_init(void)
return -ENOMEM;
roots_per_node = num_roots / num_nodes;
+ if (!roots_per_node) {
+ if (!cpu_feature_enabled(X86_FEATURE_HYPERVISOR))
+ pr_warn(FW_BUG "Error detecting roots per node.\n");
+ roots_per_node = 1;
+ }
count = 0;
node = 0;
^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 11+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH v3 2/2] x86/amd_node: Remove smn_exclusive
2026-08-31 2:30 ` Borislav Petkov
@ 2026-08-31 17:52 ` Jason Andryuk
2026-09-01 0:27 ` Borislav Petkov
0 siblings, 1 reply; 11+ messages in thread
From: Jason Andryuk @ 2026-08-31 17:52 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Borislav Petkov
Cc: Dave Hansen, H. Peter Anvin, Ingo Molnar, Mario Limonciello,
Thomas Gleixner, x86, Yazen Ghannam, linux-kernel, Penny Zheng,
stable, Mario Limonciello (AMD)
On 2026-08-30 22:30, Borislav Petkov wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 25, 2026 at 05:48:03PM -0400, Jason Andryuk wrote:
>> - root = amd_roots[node];
>> - if (!root)
>> + /*
>> + * non-NULL amd_roots indicates pci_request_config_region_exclusive()
>> + * succeeded and userspace cannot access the registers.
>> + */
>> + if (!amd_roots)
>
> So then this should be
>
> if (amd_roots)
> return err;
>
> ?
No, the code and the comment are both correct as posted. It's just that
I wrote the comment reversed from the code to state the positive
property we want.
Flipping it would be:
"NULL amd_roots means pci_request_config_region_exclusive() failed and
userspace can access the registers."
But I'd like to reconsider this comment. There is an existing comment
before pci_request_config_region_exclusive() in amd_smn_init() stating
its purpose. The commit message explains how smn_exclusive is no longer
needed. That seems enough to make the code change without adding a
comment. I wasn't sure how to phrase the comment because it feels out
of place to me.
Because the other side is that it is a valid NULL check to prevent
dereferencing amd_roots. That is the important part. Maybe the commit
messages should have been "Avoid NULL deref in __amd_smn_rw()" to
highlight that? When you look at the code as a whole, smn_exclusive
isn't doing anything, which is why I removed it.
I'll change this whichever way you want. It's not a big deal, which is
why I added the comment like you requested originally.
Regards,
Jason
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 11+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH v3 2/2] x86/amd_node: Remove smn_exclusive
2026-08-31 17:52 ` Jason Andryuk
@ 2026-09-01 0:27 ` Borislav Petkov
2026-09-01 11:59 ` Jason Andryuk
0 siblings, 1 reply; 11+ messages in thread
From: Borislav Petkov @ 2026-09-01 0:27 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Jason Andryuk
Cc: Dave Hansen, H. Peter Anvin, Ingo Molnar, Mario Limonciello,
Thomas Gleixner, x86, Yazen Ghannam, linux-kernel, Penny Zheng,
stable, Mario Limonciello (AMD)
On Mon, Aug 31, 2026 at 01:52:08PM -0400, Jason Andryuk wrote:
> No, the code and the comment are both correct as posted. It's just that I
> wrote the comment reversed from the code to state the positive property we
> want.
So if amd_smn_init() succeeds, that means we have registered the PCI config
regions of the PCI roots, including the SMN ones, as IORESOURCE_EXCLUSIVE and
they won't be exported to userspace through /dev/mem and what not.
So, any caller of __amd_smn_rw() should fail because it is coming from kernel
space and it can expect that userspace could interfere with the hw and thus
not a good idea.
So yes, this is what got me confused and the (!amd_roots) check is correct.
> I'll change this whichever way you want. It's not a big deal, which is why
> I added the comment like you requested originally.
I think I already "intercepted" your suggestion, see here:
From 1a1c4addc5a14e9ef2bb7d351a62ff4563d0f10a Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Jason Andryuk <jason.andryuk@amd.com>
Date: Tue, 25 Aug 2026 17:48:03 -0400
Subject: [PATCH] x86/amd_node: Prevent potential NULL pointer dereference
amd_smn_read/write() are exported functions around __amd_smn_rw(), so
they are always available even if amd_smn_init() fails. In that case,
amd_roots is NULL and __amd_smn_rw() will access uninitialized memory.
Then, commit
83518453074d ("x86/amd_node: Add SMN offsets to exclusive region access")
added smn_exclusive which indicated the calls to
pci_request_config_region_exclusive() succeeded to prevent concurrent
userspace access.
Commit
0a4b61d9c2e4 ("x86/amd_node: Fix AMD root device caching")
re-ordered initialization so pci_request_config_region_exclusive() is called
earlier and a failure exits amd_smn_init() before allocating amd_roots.
Setting smn_exclusive moved to the end of amd_smn_init(), after amd_roots is
allocated. It became redundant and can be removed.
Replace smn_exclusive with directly checking amd_roots to avoid a potential
NULL pointer dereference.
[ bp: Reorg commit message, touchup comment. ]
Fixes: 77466b798d59 ("x86/amd_node: Remove dependency on AMD_NB")
Signed-off-by: Jason Andryuk <jason.andryuk@amd.com>
Signed-off-by: Borislav Petkov (AMD) <bp@alien8.de>
Reviewed-by: Yazen Ghannam <yazen.ghannam@amd.com>
Reviewed-by: Mario Limonciello (AMD) <superm1@kernel.org>
Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org
Link: https://patch.msgid.link/20260825214805.39148-3-jason.andryuk@amd.com
---
arch/x86/kernel/amd_node.c | 14 ++++++++------
1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
diff --git a/arch/x86/kernel/amd_node.c b/arch/x86/kernel/amd_node.c
index 408b9fd48349..762585775b5a 100644
--- a/arch/x86/kernel/amd_node.c
+++ b/arch/x86/kernel/amd_node.c
@@ -38,7 +38,6 @@ static struct pci_dev **amd_roots;
/* Protect the PCI config register pairs used for SMN. */
static DEFINE_MUTEX(smn_mutex);
-static bool smn_exclusive;
#define SMN_INDEX_OFFSET 0x60
#define SMN_DATA_OFFSET 0x64
@@ -91,11 +90,16 @@ static int __amd_smn_rw(u8 i_off, u8 d_off, u16 node, u32 address, u32 *value, b
if (node >= amd_num_nodes())
return err;
- root = amd_roots[node];
- if (!root)
+ /*
+ * Uninitialized amd_roots indicates pci_request_config_region_exclusive()
+ * didn't run or failed and thus the kernel cannot rely on having
+ * exclusive access to SMN registers so prevent that.
+ */
+ if (!amd_roots)
return err;
- if (!smn_exclusive)
+ root = amd_roots[node];
+ if (!root)
return err;
guard(mutex)(&smn_mutex);
@@ -313,8 +317,6 @@ static int __init amd_smn_init(void)
debugfs_create_file("value", 0600, debugfs_dir, NULL, &smn_value_fops);
}
- smn_exclusive = true;
-
return 0;
}
--
2.53.0
--
Regards/Gruss,
Boris.
https://people.kernel.org/tglx/notes-about-netiquette
^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 11+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH v3 2/2] x86/amd_node: Remove smn_exclusive
2026-09-01 0:27 ` Borislav Petkov
@ 2026-09-01 11:59 ` Jason Andryuk
0 siblings, 0 replies; 11+ messages in thread
From: Jason Andryuk @ 2026-09-01 11:59 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Borislav Petkov
Cc: Dave Hansen, H. Peter Anvin, Ingo Molnar, Mario Limonciello,
Thomas Gleixner, x86, Yazen Ghannam, linux-kernel, Penny Zheng,
stable, Mario Limonciello (AMD)
On 2026-08-31 20:27, Borislav Petkov wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 31, 2026 at 01:52:08PM -0400, Jason Andryuk wrote:
>> No, the code and the comment are both correct as posted. It's just that I
>> wrote the comment reversed from the code to state the positive property we
>> want.
>
> So if amd_smn_init() succeeds, that means we have registered the PCI config
> regions of the PCI roots, including the SMN ones, as IORESOURCE_EXCLUSIVE and
> they won't be exported to userspace through /dev/mem and what not.
>
> So, any caller of __amd_smn_rw() should fail because it is coming from kernel
> space and it can expect that userspace could interfere with the hw and thus
> not a good idea.
>
> So yes, this is what got me confused and the (!amd_roots) check is correct.
>
>> I'll change this whichever way you want. It's not a big deal, which is why
>> I added the comment like you requested originally.
>
> I think I already "intercepted" your suggestion, see here:
>
> From 1a1c4addc5a14e9ef2bb7d351a62ff4563d0f10a Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
> From: Jason Andryuk <jason.andryuk@amd.com>
> Date: Tue, 25 Aug 2026 17:48:03 -0400
> Subject: [PATCH] x86/amd_node: Prevent potential NULL pointer dereference
>
> amd_smn_read/write() are exported functions around __amd_smn_rw(), so
> they are always available even if amd_smn_init() fails. In that case,
> amd_roots is NULL and __amd_smn_rw() will access uninitialized memory.
>
> Then, commit
>
> 83518453074d ("x86/amd_node: Add SMN offsets to exclusive region access")
>
> added smn_exclusive which indicated the calls to
> pci_request_config_region_exclusive() succeeded to prevent concurrent
> userspace access.
>
> Commit
>
> 0a4b61d9c2e4 ("x86/amd_node: Fix AMD root device caching")
>
> re-ordered initialization so pci_request_config_region_exclusive() is called
> earlier and a failure exits amd_smn_init() before allocating amd_roots.
> Setting smn_exclusive moved to the end of amd_smn_init(), after amd_roots is
> allocated. It became redundant and can be removed.
>
> Replace smn_exclusive with directly checking amd_roots to avoid a potential
> NULL pointer dereference.
>
> [ bp: Reorg commit message, touchup comment. ]
>
> Fixes: 77466b798d59 ("x86/amd_node: Remove dependency on AMD_NB")
> Signed-off-by: Jason Andryuk <jason.andryuk@amd.com>
> Signed-off-by: Borislav Petkov (AMD) <bp@alien8.de>
> Reviewed-by: Yazen Ghannam <yazen.ghannam@amd.com>
> Reviewed-by: Mario Limonciello (AMD) <superm1@kernel.org>
> Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org
> Link: https://patch.msgid.link/20260825214805.39148-3-jason.andryuk@amd.com
Looks good to me.
Thanks,
Jason
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 11+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2026-09-01 11:59 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 11+ messages (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2026-08-25 21:48 [PATCH v3 0/2] x86/amd_node: Fixes for virtualized systems Jason Andryuk
2026-08-25 21:48 ` [PATCH v3 1/2] x86/amd_node: Avoid divide by zero on " Jason Andryuk
2026-08-26 4:45 ` Borislav Petkov
2026-08-26 12:15 ` Jason Andryuk
2026-08-26 15:55 ` Borislav Petkov
2026-08-31 17:35 ` [tip: x86/urgent] " tip-bot2 for Jason Andryuk
2026-08-25 21:48 ` [PATCH v3 2/2] x86/amd_node: Remove smn_exclusive Jason Andryuk
2026-08-31 2:30 ` Borislav Petkov
2026-08-31 17:52 ` Jason Andryuk
2026-09-01 0:27 ` Borislav Petkov
2026-09-01 11:59 ` Jason Andryuk
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).