From: Alex Williamson <alex.williamson@redhat.com>
To: Keqian Zhu <zhukeqian1@huawei.com>
Cc: Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com>,
jiangkunkun@huawei.com, kvm@vger.kernel.org,
Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>,
Kirti Wankhede <kwankhede@nvidia.com>,
Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>,
kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu, Marc Zyngier <maz@kernel.org>,
Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano@linaro.org>,
wanghaibin.wang@huawei.com,
Julien Thierry <julien.thierry.kdev@gmail.com>,
Suzuki K Poulose <suzuki.poulose@arm.com>,
Alexios Zavras <alexios.zavras@intel.com>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
Cornelia Huck <cohuck@redhat.com>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, iommu@lists.linux-foundation.org,
James Morse <james.morse@arm.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
Robin Murphy <robin.murphy@arm.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 2/2] vfio/iommu_type1: Fix some sanity checks in detach group
Date: Wed, 27 Jan 2021 16:46:41 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20210127164641.36e17bf5@omen.home.shazbot.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20210122092635.19900-3-zhukeqian1@huawei.com>
On Fri, 22 Jan 2021 17:26:35 +0800
Keqian Zhu <zhukeqian1@huawei.com> wrote:
> vfio_sanity_check_pfn_list() is used to check whether pfn_list and
> notifier are empty when remove the external domain, so it makes a
> wrong assumption that only external domain will use the pinning
> interface.
>
> Now we apply the pfn_list check when a vfio_dma is removed and apply
> the notifier check when all domains are removed.
>
> Fixes: a54eb55045ae ("vfio iommu type1: Add support for mediated devices")
> Signed-off-by: Keqian Zhu <zhukeqian1@huawei.com>
> ---
> drivers/vfio/vfio_iommu_type1.c | 33 ++++++++++-----------------------
> 1 file changed, 10 insertions(+), 23 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/vfio/vfio_iommu_type1.c b/drivers/vfio/vfio_iommu_type1.c
> index 161725395f2f..d8c10f508321 100644
> --- a/drivers/vfio/vfio_iommu_type1.c
> +++ b/drivers/vfio/vfio_iommu_type1.c
> @@ -957,6 +957,7 @@ static long vfio_unmap_unpin(struct vfio_iommu *iommu, struct vfio_dma *dma,
>
> static void vfio_remove_dma(struct vfio_iommu *iommu, struct vfio_dma *dma)
> {
> + WARN_ON(!RB_EMPTY_ROOT(&dma->pfn_list));
> vfio_unmap_unpin(iommu, dma, true);
> vfio_unlink_dma(iommu, dma);
> put_task_struct(dma->task);
> @@ -2250,23 +2251,6 @@ static void vfio_iommu_unmap_unpin_reaccount(struct vfio_iommu *iommu)
> }
> }
>
> -static void vfio_sanity_check_pfn_list(struct vfio_iommu *iommu)
> -{
> - struct rb_node *n;
> -
> - n = rb_first(&iommu->dma_list);
> - for (; n; n = rb_next(n)) {
> - struct vfio_dma *dma;
> -
> - dma = rb_entry(n, struct vfio_dma, node);
> -
> - if (WARN_ON(!RB_EMPTY_ROOT(&dma->pfn_list)))
> - break;
> - }
> - /* mdev vendor driver must unregister notifier */
> - WARN_ON(iommu->notifier.head);
> -}
> -
> /*
> * Called when a domain is removed in detach. It is possible that
> * the removed domain decided the iova aperture window. Modify the
> @@ -2366,10 +2350,10 @@ static void vfio_iommu_type1_detach_group(void *iommu_data,
> kfree(group);
>
> if (list_empty(&iommu->external_domain->group_list)) {
> - vfio_sanity_check_pfn_list(iommu);
> -
> - if (!IS_IOMMU_CAP_DOMAIN_IN_CONTAINER(iommu))
> + if (!IS_IOMMU_CAP_DOMAIN_IN_CONTAINER(iommu)) {
> + WARN_ON(iommu->notifier.head);
> vfio_iommu_unmap_unpin_all(iommu);
> + }
>
> kfree(iommu->external_domain);
> iommu->external_domain = NULL;
> @@ -2403,10 +2387,12 @@ static void vfio_iommu_type1_detach_group(void *iommu_data,
> */
> if (list_empty(&domain->group_list)) {
> if (list_is_singular(&iommu->domain_list)) {
> - if (!iommu->external_domain)
> + if (!iommu->external_domain) {
> + WARN_ON(iommu->notifier.head);
> vfio_iommu_unmap_unpin_all(iommu);
> - else
> + } else {
> vfio_iommu_unmap_unpin_reaccount(iommu);
> + }
> }
> iommu_domain_free(domain->domain);
> list_del(&domain->next);
> @@ -2488,9 +2474,10 @@ static void vfio_iommu_type1_release(void *iommu_data)
> struct vfio_iommu *iommu = iommu_data;
> struct vfio_domain *domain, *domain_tmp;
>
> + WARN_ON(iommu->notifier.head);
I don't see that this does any harm, but isn't it actually redundant?
It seems vfio-core only calls the iommu backend release function after
removing all the groups, so the tests in _detach_group should catch all
cases. We're expecting the vfio bus/mdev driver to remove the notifier
when a device is closed, which necessarily occurs before detaching the
group. Thanks,
Alex
> +
> if (iommu->external_domain) {
> vfio_release_domain(iommu->external_domain, true);
> - vfio_sanity_check_pfn_list(iommu);
> kfree(iommu->external_domain);
> }
>
_______________________________________________
iommu mailing list
iommu@lists.linux-foundation.org
https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/iommu
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2021-01-27 23:46 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2021-01-22 9:26 [PATCH v3 0/2] vfio/iommu_type1: some fixes Keqian Zhu
2021-01-22 9:26 ` [PATCH v3 1/2] vfio/iommu_type1: Populate full dirty when detach non-pinned group Keqian Zhu
2021-01-22 9:26 ` [PATCH v3 2/2] vfio/iommu_type1: Fix some sanity checks in detach group Keqian Zhu
2021-01-27 23:46 ` Alex Williamson [this message]
2021-01-28 15:21 ` Keqian Zhu
2021-01-29 7:47 ` Keqian Zhu
2021-02-02 17:21 ` [PATCH v3 0/2] vfio/iommu_type1: some fixes Alex Williamson
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=20210127164641.36e17bf5@omen.home.shazbot.org \
--to=alex.williamson@redhat.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=alexios.zavras@intel.com \
--cc=catalin.marinas@arm.com \
--cc=cohuck@redhat.com \
--cc=daniel.lezcano@linaro.org \
--cc=iommu@lists.linux-foundation.org \
--cc=james.morse@arm.com \
--cc=jiangkunkun@huawei.com \
--cc=julien.thierry.kdev@gmail.com \
--cc=kvm@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu \
--cc=kwankhede@nvidia.com \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mark.rutland@arm.com \
--cc=maz@kernel.org \
--cc=robin.murphy@arm.com \
--cc=suzuki.poulose@arm.com \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
--cc=wanghaibin.wang@huawei.com \
--cc=will@kernel.org \
--cc=zhukeqian1@huawei.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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).