lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2015]   [Apr]   [16]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH] firmware: dmi_scan: Fix ordering of product_uuid
On 2015/4/16 15:09, Jean Delvare wrote:
> Hi zduan,
>
> Thanks for your reply.
>
> Le Thursday 16 April 2015 à 14:22 +0800, Zhenzhong Duan a écrit :
>> On 2015/4/15 17:02, Jean Delvare wrote:
>>> In function dmi_present(), dmi_walk_early() calls dmi_table(), which
>>> calls dmi_decode(), which ultimately calls dmi_save_uuid(). This last
>>> function makes a decision based on the value of global variable
>>> dmi_ver. The problem is that this variable is set right _after_
>>> dmi_walk_early() returns. So dmi_save_uuid() always sees dmi_ver == 0
>>> regardless of the actual version implemented.
>>>
>>> This causes /sys/class/dmi/id/product_uuid to always use the old
>>> ordering even on systems implementing DMI/SMBIOS 2.6 or later, which
>>> should use the new ordering.
>>>
>>> This is broken since kernel v3.8 for legacy DMI implementations and
>>> since kernel v3.10 for SMBIOS 2 implementations. SMBIOS 3
>>> implementations with the 64-bit entry point are not affected.
>>>
>>> The first breakage does not matter much as in practice legacy DMI
>>> implementations are always for versions older than 2.6, which is when
>>> the UUID ordering changed. The second breakage is more problematic as
>>> it affects the vast majority of x86 systems manufactured since 2009.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Jean Delvare <jdelvare@suse.de>
>>> Fixes: 9f9c9cbb6057 ("drivers/firmware/dmi_scan.c: fetch dmi version from SMBIOS if it exists")
>> I think above line should be removed as dmi_ver is set before
>> dmi_walk_early with the commit, see below clip.
>> We did get right UUID order with SMBIOS 2.6 per customer test.
> I bet your customers tested only with recent SMBIOS implementations that
> have the _SM_ entry point. They did not test on systems with only legacy
> _DMI_ entry points. As I said above, odds are that such systems would
> implement a version of the specification older than 2.6 anyway, so the
> bug wouldn't trigger.
In fact, I have considered the fact that legacy DMI is always older than
2.6 when design.
>
> I agree that 9f9c9cbb6057 is not problematic in practice and this is why
> I wrote that the fix is only needed for kernels v3.10+, not v3.8+. But I
> think it is still interesting to document the first commit which
> introduced the bug. I'm pretty sure that the second faulty commit would
> not have been faulty if the first commit had been correct. After all,
> that second commit aligned the _SM_ code path on the _DMI_ code path,
> without realizing that the latter had a bug.
Ok, just keep it
>
>> +static int __init smbios_present(const char __iomem *p)
>> +{
>> + u8 buf[32];
>> + int offset = 0;
>> +
>> + memcpy_fromio(buf, p, 32);
>> + if ((buf[5] < 32) && dmi_checksum(buf, buf[5])) {
>> + dmi_ver = (buf[6] << 8) + buf[7];
> But look at the _DMI_ code path:
>
> static int __init dmi_present(const char __iomem *p)
> {
> (...)
> if (dmi_walk_early(dmi_decode) == 0) {
> if (dmi_ver)
> pr_info("SMBIOS %d.%d present.\n",
> dmi_ver >> 8, dmi_ver & 0xFF);
> else {
> dmi_ver = (buf[14] & 0xF0) << 4 |
> (buf[14] & 0x0F);
> pr_info("Legacy DMI %d.%d present.\n",
> dmi_ver >> 8, dmi_ver & 0xFF);
> }
> dmi_dump_ids();
> return 0;
> }
>
> Here dmi_ver may be set _after_ dmi_walk_early is called.
>
>>> Fixes: 79bae42d51a5 ("dmi_scan: refactor dmi_scan_machine(), {smbios,dmi}_present()")
>>> Cc: Zhenzhong Duan <zhenzhong.duan@oracle.com>
>>> Cc: Ben Hutchings <ben@decadent.org.uk>
>>> Cc: Artem Savkov <artem.savkov@gmail.com>
>>> Cc: Ivan Khoronzhuk <ivan.khoronzhuk@linaro.org>
>>> Cc: Matt Fleming <matt.fleming@intel.com>
>>> Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org [v3.10+]
>>> ---
>>> drivers/firmware/dmi_scan.c | 7 ++++---
>>> 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
>>>
>>> --- linux-4.0.orig/drivers/firmware/dmi_scan.c 2015-04-13 00:12:50.000000000 +0200
>>> +++ linux-4.0/drivers/firmware/dmi_scan.c 2015-04-15 10:24:37.556994240 +0200
>>> @@ -499,18 +499,19 @@ static int __init dmi_present(const u8 *
>>> buf += 16;
>>>
>>> if (memcmp(buf, "_DMI_", 5) == 0 && dmi_checksum(buf, 15)) {
>>> + if (smbios_ver)
>>> + dmi_ver = smbios_ver;
>>> + else
>>> + dmi_ver = (buf[14] & 0xF0) << 4 | (buf[14] & 0x0F);
>>> dmi_num = get_unaligned_le16(buf + 12);
>>> dmi_len = get_unaligned_le16(buf + 6);
>>> dmi_base = get_unaligned_le32(buf + 8);
>>>
>>> if (dmi_walk_early(dmi_decode) == 0) {
>>> if (smbios_ver) {
>>> - dmi_ver = smbios_ver;
>>> pr_info("SMBIOS %d.%d present.\n",
>>> dmi_ver >> 8, dmi_ver & 0xFF);
>>> } else {
>>> - dmi_ver = (buf[14] & 0xF0) << 4 |
>>> - (buf[14] & 0x0F);
>>> pr_info("Legacy DMI %d.%d present.\n",
>>> dmi_ver >> 8, dmi_ver & 0xFF);
>>> }
>>>
>>>
>> The basic idea is right, but you ignore the case dmi_walk_early may
>> fail, though looks impossible when bootup.
>>
>> Better to add below for robust.
>>
>> @@ -521,6 +521,6 @@ static int __init dmi_present(const u8 *
>>
>> return 0;
>> }
>> }
>> + dmi_ver = 0;
>> return 1;
>> }
>>
> What is the value of this? dmi_ver will never be accessed after this
> point anyway, as far as I can see.
Same as above, future commit may not realize you bring this faulty when
they want to use dmi_ver.

zduan


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2015-04-16 11:21    [W:0.061 / U:0.600 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site