RE: [PATCH v6 13/24] vfio/iommufd: Split the compat_ioas attach out from vfio_iommufd_bind()

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

 



> From: Liu, Yi L <yi.l.liu@xxxxxxxxx>
> Sent: Saturday, March 11, 2023 6:24 PM
> > > >
> > > > -	ret = vdev->ops->bind_iommufd(vdev, ictx, &device_id);
> > > > -	if (ret)
> > > > -		return ret;
> > > > +	/* The legacy path has no way to return the device id */
> > > > +	return vdev->ops->bind_iommufd(vdev, ictx, &device_id);
> > > > +}
> > > >
> > > > -	ret = iommufd_vfio_compat_ioas_get_id(ictx, &ioas_id);
> > > > -	if (ret)
> > > > -		goto err_unbind;
> > > > -	ret = vdev->ops->attach_ioas(vdev, &ioas_id);
> > > > -	if (ret)
> > > > -		goto err_unbind;
> > >
> > > after noiommu check and attach_ioas are moved out then this
> > > entire function can be removed now. Just call the ops in
> > > vfio_device_first_open().
> >
> > Yes. and also no vfio_iommufd_unbind().
> 
> Seems still necessary to have this wrapper. .bind_iommufd callback would
> be NULL if CONFIG_IOMMUFD==n. If we call ops->bind_iommufd directly
> in vfio_device_first_open() of vfio_main.c, it may trigger kernel panic
> for NULL pointer dereference if there is wrong code that passes valid
> iommufd pointer.. Ideally, if CONFIG_IOMMUFD==n, vfio_device_first_open
> should not receive valid iommufd pointer hence won't call ops-
> >bind_iommufd
> at all. So it deserves a panic. However, if we have a wrapper for it, such code
> may just fail with -EOPNOTSUPPT.
> 

ok, let's keep this wrapper then. I didn't realize it's NULL if
CONFIG_IOMMUFD==n.




[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
[Index of Archives]     [Kernel Development]     [Kernel Newbies]     [IDE]     [Security]     [Git]     [Netfilter]     [Bugtraq]     [Yosemite Info]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux RAID]     [Linux ATA RAID]     [Samba]     [Linux Media]     [Device Mapper]

  Powered by Linux