From: Jan Kiszka <jan.kiszka@siemens.com>
To: Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
"linux-pci@vger.kernel.org" <linux-pci@vger.kernel.org>
Cc: Alex Williamson <alex.williamson@redhat.com>,
"Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@redhat.com>,
Jesse Barnes <jbarnes@virtuousgeek.org>,
Matthew Wilcox <matthew@wil.cx>,
Brian King <brking@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Subject: Broken pci_block_user_cfg_access interface
Date: Wed, 24 Aug 2011 12:43:35 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4E54D5D7.8050807@siemens.com> (raw)
Hi,
trying to port the generic device interrupt masking pattern of
uio_pci_generic to KVM's device assignment code, I stumbled over some
fundamental problem with the current pci_block/unblock_user_cfg_access
interface: it does not provide any synchronization between blocking
sides. This allows user space to trigger a kernel BUG, just run two
while true; do echo 1 > /sys/bus/pci/devices/<some-device>/reset; done
loops in parallel and watch the kernel oops.
Instead of some funky open-coded locking mechanism, we would rather need
a plain mutex across both the user space access (via sysfs) and the
sections guarded by pci_block/unblock_user_cfg_access so far. But I'm
not sure which of them already allow sleeping, specifically if the IPR
driver would be fine with such a change. Can someone in the CC list
comment on this?
uio_pci_generic would definitely not be able to sleep as it takes the
lock from (potentially hard) IRQ context. This particular use case, RMW
of command/status word, requires a separate mechanism. I'm considering
to introduce a dedicated raw spinlock with IRQ protection for that
words, maybe also a PCI core service to abstract INTx testing and masking.
Any further thoughts on how to resolve this issue?
Thanks,
Jan
--
Siemens AG, Corporate Technology, CT T DE IT 1
Corporate Competence Center Embedded Linux
next reply other threads:[~2011-08-24 10:43 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 35+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2011-08-24 10:43 Jan Kiszka [this message]
2011-08-24 15:02 ` Broken pci_block_user_cfg_access interface Brian King
2011-08-25 9:19 ` Jan Kiszka
2011-08-25 9:40 ` Michael S. Tsirkin
2011-08-25 10:34 ` Jan Kiszka
2011-08-25 13:06 ` Brian King
2011-08-25 13:12 ` Brian King
2011-08-25 13:16 ` Jan Kiszka
2011-08-25 13:24 ` Brian King
2011-08-25 18:16 ` Michael S. Tsirkin
2011-08-25 13:02 ` Brian King
2011-08-25 13:06 ` Jan Kiszka
2011-08-25 18:19 ` Michael S. Tsirkin
2011-08-25 18:52 ` Jan Kiszka
2011-08-25 19:07 ` Michael S. Tsirkin
2011-08-25 19:26 ` Jan Kiszka
2011-08-29 15:05 ` Michael S. Tsirkin
2011-08-29 15:42 ` Jan Kiszka
2011-08-29 15:58 ` Michael S. Tsirkin
2011-08-29 16:14 ` Jan Kiszka
2011-08-29 16:23 ` Michael S. Tsirkin
2011-08-29 16:26 ` Jan Kiszka
2011-08-29 18:47 ` Jan Kiszka
2011-08-29 19:18 ` Michael S. Tsirkin
2011-08-30 16:30 ` Brian King
2011-08-30 18:01 ` Michael S. Tsirkin
2011-08-30 19:41 ` Brian King
2011-09-02 7:48 ` [RFC] pci: Rework config space blocking services Jan Kiszka
2011-09-06 7:00 ` Michael S. Tsirkin
2011-09-06 7:18 ` Jan Kiszka
2011-09-06 8:04 ` Michael S. Tsirkin
2011-09-06 8:27 ` Jan Kiszka
2011-09-06 8:47 ` Michael S. Tsirkin
2011-09-06 8:48 ` Jan Kiszka
2011-09-07 13:46 ` Brian King
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=4E54D5D7.8050807@siemens.com \
--to=jan.kiszka@siemens.com \
--cc=alex.williamson@redhat.com \
--cc=brking@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=jbarnes@virtuousgeek.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-pci@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=matthew@wil.cx \
--cc=mst@redhat.com \
/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