Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751490AbdCXRWd (ORCPT ); Fri, 24 Mar 2017 13:22:33 -0400 Received: from mail-pf0-f178.google.com ([209.85.192.178]:36582 "EHLO mail-pf0-f178.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751235AbdCXRWX (ORCPT ); Fri, 24 Mar 2017 13:22:23 -0400 Date: Fri, 24 Mar 2017 10:22:19 -0700 From: Brian Norris To: Bjorn Helgaas Cc: Bjorn Helgaas , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Shawn Lin , Jeffy Chen , Wenrui Li , linux-pci@vger.kernel.org, linux-rockchip@lists.infradead.org, Ray Jui Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 3/5] PCI: rockchip: add remove() support Message-ID: <20170324172218.GA119093@google.com> References: <20170310024617.67303-1-briannorris@chromium.org> <20170310024617.67303-3-briannorris@chromium.org> <20170324142541.GA25380@bhelgaas-glaptop.roam.corp.google.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20170324142541.GA25380@bhelgaas-glaptop.roam.corp.google.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 2612 Lines: 80 Hi Bjorn, On Fri, Mar 24, 2017 at 09:25:41AM -0500, Bjorn Helgaas wrote: > On Thu, Mar 09, 2017 at 06:46:15PM -0800, Brian Norris wrote: > > Currently, if we try to unbind the platform device, the remove will > > succeed, but the removal won't undo most of the registration, leaving > > partially-configured PCI devices in the system. > > > > This allows, for example, a simple 'lspci' to crash the system, as it > > will try to touch the freed (via devm_*) driver structures. > > > > So let's implement device remove(). > > How exactly do you reproduce this problem? On RK3399: # echo f8000000.pcie > /sys/bus/platform/drivers/rockchip-pcie/unbind # lspci > There are several other drivers that are superficially similar, e.g., > they define a struct platform_driver without a .remove method. Do > they all have this problem? Some of them do set .suppress_bind_attrs > = true; is that relevant to this scenario? Yes, I think .suppress_bind_attrs would be enough to prevent this, according to my reading of the code and comments: * @suppress_bind_attrs: Disables bind/unbind via sysfs. > In fact, the only other callers of pci_remove_root_bus() are > iproc_pcie_remove(), hv_pci_remove(), and vmd_remove(). Then iProc would suffer from the same memory leak in of_pci_get_host_bridge_resources() [1]. It *would* suffer from the same domain allocation issues in of_pci_bus_find_domain_nr() -> pci_get_new_domain_nr() [2], except that all iProc device trees (in mainline at least) use the 'linux,pci-domain' property to avoid it. HyperV and VMD drivers use ACPI, which uses neither pci_get_new_domain_nr() nor of_pci_get_host_bridge_resources(). > These don't have .remove: > > imx6_pcie_driver > ls_pcie_driver > armada8k_pcie_driver > artpec6_pcie_driver > dw_plat_pcie_driver > hisi_pcie_driver > hisi_pcie_almost_ecam_driver > spear13xx_pcie_driver > gen_pci_driver I think these are all technically broken. > These don't have .remove but do set .suppress_bind_attrs = true: > > dra7xx_pcie_driver > qcom_pcie_driver > advk_pcie_driver > mvebu_pcie_driver > rcar_pci_driver > rcar_pcie_driver > tegra_pcie_driver > altera_pcie_driver > nwl_pcie_driver > xilinx_pcie_driver Those are fine then, I suppose. Brian [1] PCI: return resource_entry in pci_add_resource helpers https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/9642229/ of/pci: Fix memory leak in of_pci_get_host_bridge_resources https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/9642231/ [2] PCI: use IDA to manage domain number if not getting it from DT https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/9638353/