The code seems to stuff these pfns into iommu pts (or something like that, I didn't follow), but there's no mmu_notifier to ensure that access is synchronized with pte updates. Hence mark these as unsafe. This means that with CONFIG_STRICT_FOLLOW_PFN, these will be rejected. Real fix is to wire up an mmu_notifier ... somehow. Probably means any invalidate is a fatal fault for this vfio device, but then this shouldn't ever happen if userspace is reasonable. Signed-off-by: Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@xxxxxxxxx> Cc: Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@xxxxxxxx> Cc: Kees Cook <keescook@xxxxxxxxxxxx> Cc: Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@xxxxxxxxx> Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> Cc: John Hubbard <jhubbard@xxxxxxxxxx> Cc: Jérôme Glisse <jglisse@xxxxxxxxxx> Cc: Jan Kara <jack@xxxxxxx> Cc: Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@xxxxxxxxx> Cc: linux-mm@xxxxxxxxx Cc: linux-arm-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Cc: linux-samsung-soc@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Cc: linux-media@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Cc: Alex Williamson <alex.williamson@xxxxxxxxxx> Cc: Cornelia Huck <cohuck@xxxxxxxxxx> Cc: kvm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx --- drivers/vfio/vfio_iommu_type1.c | 4 ++-- 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) diff --git a/drivers/vfio/vfio_iommu_type1.c b/drivers/vfio/vfio_iommu_type1.c index 5fbf0c1f7433..a4d53f3d0a35 100644 --- a/drivers/vfio/vfio_iommu_type1.c +++ b/drivers/vfio/vfio_iommu_type1.c @@ -421,7 +421,7 @@ static int follow_fault_pfn(struct vm_area_struct *vma, struct mm_struct *mm, { int ret; - ret = follow_pfn(vma, vaddr, pfn); + ret = unsafe_follow_pfn(vma, vaddr, pfn); if (ret) { bool unlocked = false; @@ -435,7 +435,7 @@ static int follow_fault_pfn(struct vm_area_struct *vma, struct mm_struct *mm, if (ret) return ret; - ret = follow_pfn(vma, vaddr, pfn); + ret = unsafe_follow_pfn(vma, vaddr, pfn); } return ret; -- 2.28.0 _______________________________________________ dri-devel mailing list dri-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel