From: Jan Kiszka <jan.kiszka@siemens.com>
To: Brian King <brking@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Cc: "Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@redhat.com>,
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>,
Jesse Barnes <jbarnes@virtuousgeek.org>,
Matthew Wilcox <matthew@wil.cx>
Subject: Re: Broken pci_block_user_cfg_access interface
Date: Thu, 25 Aug 2011 15:16:13 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4E564B1D.2090201@siemens.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <4E564A45.2040300@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
On 2011-08-25 15:12, Brian King wrote:
> On 08/25/2011 08:06 AM, Brian King wrote:
>> On 08/25/2011 04:40 AM, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
>>> On Thu, Aug 25, 2011 at 11:19:54AM +0200, 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)?
>>>>
>>>>> When the pci_block/unblock API was
>>>>> originally added, it did not have the checking it has today to detect
>>>>> if it is being called nested. This was added some time later. The
>>>>
>>>> For a reason...
>>>>
>>>>> 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.
>>>>
>>>> So it's pointless to tweak the current pci_block semantics, we rather
>>>> need to establish a new mechanism that synchronizes *all* users of the
>>>> config space.
>>>>
>>>> Jan
>>>
>>> It does look like all of the problems are actually around reset.
>>> So maybe all we need to do is synchronize the sysfs-triggered
>>> pci_reset_function with pci_block/unblock_user_cfg_access?
>>>
>>> In other words, when reset is triggered from sysfs, it
>>> should obey pci_block/unblock_user_cfg_access
>>> restrictions?
>>>
>>> It does not look like reset needs to sleep, so fixing
>>> that should not be hard, right?
>>
>> This sounds reasonable to me. Although I think we still have the driver issue
>> I described in my previous mail. Perhaps the best way to resolve that would
>> be to allow the adapter driver to register a reset function so that the
>> driver could be the one driving the reset, allowing the driver to synchronize
>> the reset with whatever else might be going on and also then reinitialize
>> the adapter firmware, etc. If no driver was loaded or no driver specific
>> reset function registered, the current reset mechanism would be invoked.
>
> This would also allow the driver to do unique types of resets for different
> adapter types. Some of the adapters the ipr driver supports need to get
> reset via BIST, others via PCIe warm reset, etc.
Is this broken ATM? I thought the PCI core would simply try all methods
+ has a quirks section for completely funky devices.
Jan
--
Siemens AG, Corporate Technology, CT T DE IT 1
Corporate Competence Center Embedded Linux
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2011-08-25 13:16 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 [this message]
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=4E564B1D.2090201@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