RE: [PATCH] cxl/memdev: Avoid mailbox functionality on device memory CXL devices

[Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@intel.com>]

Ira Weiny wrote:
> Using the proposed type-2 cxl-test device[1] the following
> splat was observed:
> 
>   BUG: kernel NULL pointer dereference, address: 0000000000000278
>   [...]
>   RIP: 0010:devm_cxl_add_memdev+0x1de/0x2c0 [cxl_core]

It would be useful to decode this to a line number, the rest of this
call trace is not adding much.

>   [...]
>   Call Trace:
>    <TASK>
>    ? __die+0x1f/0x70
>    ? page_fault_oops+0x149/0x420
>    ? fixup_exception+0x22/0x310
>    ? kernelmode_fixup_or_oops+0x84/0x110
>    ? exc_page_fault+0x6d/0x150
>    ? asm_exc_page_fault+0x22/0x30
>    ? devm_cxl_add_memdev+0x1de/0x2c0 [cxl_core]
>    cxl_mock_mem_probe+0x632/0x870 [cxl_mock_mem]
>    platform_probe+0x40/0x90
>    really_probe+0x19e/0x3e0
>    ? __pfx___driver_attach+0x10/0x10
>    __driver_probe_device+0x78/0x160
>    driver_probe_device+0x1f/0x90
>    __driver_attach+0xce/0x1c0
>    bus_for_each_dev+0x63/0xa0
>    bus_add_driver+0x112/0x210
>    driver_register+0x55/0x100
>    ? __pfx_cxl_mock_mem_driver_init+0x10/0x10 [cxl_mock_mem]
>    [...]
> 
> Commit f6b8ab32e3ec made the mailbox functionality optional.  However,
> some mailbox functionality was merged after that patch.  Therefore some
> mailbox functionality can be accessed on a device which did not set up
> the mailbox.

cxl_memdev_security_init() definitely needs to move out of
devm_cxl_add_memdev() and after that I do not think @mds NULL checks
need to be sprinkled everywhere. In other words something is wrong at a
higher level if we get into some of these helper functions without the
memory device state.

So definitely this uncovered a problem where cxl_memdev_security_init()
needs to move, but the rest of the mds NULL checks need clear
reproduction scenarios and expect most of them are precluded higher in
the call stack.