Re: [PATCH v11 09/13] iommu/sva: Refactoring iommu_sva_bind/unbind_device()

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On 2022/8/18 21:41, Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
On Wed, Aug 17, 2022 at 09:20:20AM +0800, Lu Baolu wrote:
+
+/**
+ * iommu_sva_bind_device() - Bind a process address space to a device
+ * @dev: the device
+ * @mm: the mm to bind, caller must hold a reference to mm_users
+ *
+ * Create a bond between device and address space, allowing the device to access
+ * the mm using the returned PASID. If a bond already exists between @device and
+ * @mm, it is returned and an additional reference is taken. Caller must call
+ * iommu_sva_unbind_device() to release each reference.
+ *
+ * iommu_dev_enable_feature(dev, IOMMU_DEV_FEAT_SVA) must be called first, to
+ * initialize the required SVA features.
+ *
+ * On error, returns an ERR_PTR value.
+ */
+struct iommu_sva *iommu_sva_bind_device(struct device *dev, struct mm_struct *mm)
+{
+	struct iommu_domain *domain;
+	struct iommu_sva *bond;

This is called handle below, pick one name please

Updated.


+	ioasid_t max_pasids;
+	int ret;
+
+	max_pasids = dev->iommu->max_pasids;
+	if (!max_pasids)
+		return ERR_PTR(-EOPNOTSUPP);
+
+	/* Allocate mm->pasid if necessary. */
+	ret = iommu_sva_alloc_pasid(mm, 1, max_pasids - 1);
+	if (ret)
+		return ERR_PTR(ret);
+
+	bond = kzalloc(sizeof(*bond), GFP_KERNEL);
+	if (!bond)
+		return ERR_PTR(-ENOMEM);
+
+	mutex_lock(&iommu_sva_lock);
+	/* Search for an existing domain. */
+	domain = iommu_get_domain_for_dev_pasid(dev, mm->pasid);
+	if (domain) {

This isn't safe, or sane. A driver could have attached something to
this PASID that is not a SVA domain and thus not protected by the
iommu_sva_lock.

At a minimum you should add a type match to
iommu_get_domain_for_dev_pasid(), eg to confirm it is a SVA domain and
do that check under the xa_lock of the pasid xarray.

And then the general idea is that SVA domain attach/detach must hold
this janky global lock.

Make sense. I will add this logic.


+		refcount_inc(&domain->users);

This atomic is always processed under the iommu_sva_lock, so it
doesn't need to be an atomic anymore.

Will change it to an integer.


Otherwise this design looks OK to me too

Thank you very much for your suggestions.

Best regards,
baolu




[Index of Archives]     [DMA Engine]     [Linux Coverity]     [Linux USB]     [Video for Linux]     [Linux Audio Users]     [Yosemite News]     [Linux Kernel]     [Linux SCSI]     [Greybus]

  Powered by Linux