On Thu, Nov 21, 2024 at 04:41:42PM -0600, Bjorn Helgaas wrote: > On Thu, Nov 21, 2024 at 02:13:01PM +0200, Leon Romanovsky wrote: > > On Thu, Nov 21, 2024 at 01:01:27PM +0100, Jean Delvare wrote: > > > On Wed, 13 Nov 2024 14:59:58 +0200, Leon Romanovsky wrote: > > > > --- a/drivers/pci/vpd.c > > > > +++ b/drivers/pci/vpd.c > > > > @@ -332,6 +332,14 @@ static umode_t vpd_attr_is_visible(struct kobject *kobj, > > > > if (!pdev->vpd.cap) > > > > return 0; > > > > > > > > + /* > > > > + * Mellanox devices have implementation that allows VPD read by > > > > + * unprivileged users, so just add needed bits to allow read. > > > > + */ > > > > + WARN_ON_ONCE(a->attr.mode != 0600); > > > > + if (unlikely(pdev->vendor == PCI_VENDOR_ID_MELLANOX)) > > > > + return a->attr.mode + 0044; > > ... > > > I still didn't lost hope that at some point VPD will be open for read to > > all kernel devices. > > > > Bjorn, are you ok with this patch? If yes, I'll resend the patch with > > the suggested change after the merge window. > > Reading VPD is a fairly complicated dance that only works if the VPD > data is well-formatted, and the benefit of unprivileged access seems > pretty small, so the risk/reward tradeoff for making it unprivileged > for all devices doesn't seem favorable in my mind. > > This quirk seems like the least bad option, so I guess I'm ok with it. Thanks a lot. > > Bjorn
