From: Jan Kiszka <jan.kiszka@siemens.com>
To: Brian King <brking@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Cc: Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
"linux-pci@vger.kernel.org" <linux-pci@vger.kernel.org>,
Alex Williamson <alex.williamson@redhat.com>,
"Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@redhat.com>,
Jesse Barnes <jbarnes@virtuousgeek.org>,
Matthew Wilcox <matthew@wil.cx>
Subject: Re: Broken pci_block_user_cfg_access interface
Date: Thu, 25 Aug 2011 15:06:01 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4E5648B9.7050106@siemens.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <4E5647DA.1060901@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
On 2011-08-25 15:02, Brian King wrote:
> On 08/25/2011 04:19 AM, Jan Kiszka wrote:
>> On 2011-08-24 17:02, Brian King wrote:
>>> On 08/24/2011 05:43 AM, Jan Kiszka wrote:
>>>> 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?
>>>
>>> The ipr driver calls pci_block/unblock_user_cfg_access from interrupt
>>> context, so a mutex won't work.
>>
>> Ugh. What precisely does it have to do with the config space while
>> running inside an IRQ handler (or holding a lock that synchronizes it
>> with such a handler)?
>
> The ipr driver can get an error interrupt which will trigger the driver
> to reset the adapter. While the adapter is going through reset we need
> to ensure user config accesses are blocked, since many ipr adapters
> won't respond on the PCI bus during this time.
What about offloading the reset to thread context (workqueue etc.)?
>
>
>>> API that works best for the ipr driver is to allow for many block calls,
>>> but a single unblock call unblocks access. It seems like what might
>>> work well in the case above is a block count. Each call to pci_block
>>> increments a count. Each pci_unblock decrements the count and only
>>> actually do the unblock if the count drops to zero. It should be reasonably
>>> simple for ipr to use that sort of an API as well.
>>
>> That will just paper over the underlying bug: multiple kernel users (!=
>> sysfs access) fiddle with the config space in an unsynchronized fashion.
>> Think of sysfs-triggered pci_reset_function while your ipr driver does
>> its accesses.
>
> I took a look at the sysfs triggered pci reset function and don't see any way
> that the controlling device driver ever gets to be involved in this reset.
> If code outside the ipr driver were to reset the adapter, the adapter firmware
> would be left in an uninitialized state and until scsi core starts timing
> out ops and driving EH, the card would be unusable. I can't imagine the
> ipr driver is unique in this.
Right, that's why a PCI core service is needed for coordination.
Jan
--
Siemens AG, Corporate Technology, CT T DE IT 1
Corporate Competence Center Embedded Linux
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2011-08-25 13:06 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 35+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2011-08-24 10:43 Broken pci_block_user_cfg_access interface Jan Kiszka
2011-08-24 15:02 ` 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 [this message]
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=4E5648B9.7050106@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