lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2022]   [Jun]   [6]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
Patch in this message
/
Date
SubjectRe: [PATCH 2/5] iommu: Ensure device has the same iommu_ops as the domain
From
On 2022-06-06 17:51, Nicolin Chen wrote:
> Hi Robin,
>
> On Mon, Jun 06, 2022 at 03:33:42PM +0100, Robin Murphy wrote:
>> On 2022-06-06 07:19, Nicolin Chen wrote:
>>> The core code should not call an iommu driver op with a struct device
>>> parameter unless it knows that the dev_iommu_priv_get() for that struct
>>> device was setup by the same driver. Otherwise in a mixed driver system
>>> the iommu_priv could be casted to the wrong type.
>>
>> We don't have mixed-driver systems, and there are plenty more
>> significant problems than this one to solve before we can (but thanks
>> for pointing it out - I hadn't got as far as auditing the public
>> interfaces yet). Once domains are allocated via a particular device's
>> IOMMU instance in the first place, there will be ample opportunity for
>> the core to stash suitable identifying information in the domain for
>> itself. TBH even the current code could do it without needing the
>> weirdly invasive changes here.
>
> Do you have an alternative and less invasive solution in mind?
>
>>> Store the iommu_ops pointer in the iommu_domain and use it as a check to
>>> validate that the struct device is correct before invoking any domain op
>>> that accepts a struct device.
>>
>> In fact this even describes exactly that - "Store the iommu_ops pointer
>> in the iommu_domain", vs. the "Store the iommu_ops pointer in the
>> iommu_domain_ops" which the patch is actually doing :/
>
> Will fix that.

Well, as before I'd prefer to make the code match the commit message -
if I really need to spell it out, see below - since I can't imagine that
we should ever have need to identify a set of iommu_domain_ops in
isolation, therefore I think it's considerably clearer to use the
iommu_domain itself. However, either way we really don't need this yet,
so we may as well just go ahead and remove the redundant test from VFIO
anyway, and I can add some form of this patch to my dev branch for now.

Thanks,
Robin.

----->8-----
diff --git a/drivers/iommu/iommu.c b/drivers/iommu/iommu.c
index cde2e1d6ab9b..72990edc9314 100644
--- a/drivers/iommu/iommu.c
+++ b/drivers/iommu/iommu.c
@@ -1902,6 +1902,7 @@ static struct iommu_domain
*__iommu_domain_alloc(struct device *dev,
domain->type = type;
/* Assume all sizes by default; the driver may override this later */
domain->pgsize_bitmap = ops->pgsize_bitmap;
+ domain->owner = ops;
if (!domain->ops)
domain->ops = ops->default_domain_ops;

diff --git a/include/linux/iommu.h b/include/linux/iommu.h
index 6f64cbbc6721..79e557207f53 100644
--- a/include/linux/iommu.h
+++ b/include/linux/iommu.h
@@ -89,6 +89,7 @@ struct iommu_domain_geometry {

struct iommu_domain {
unsigned type;
+ const struct iommu_ops *owner; /* Who allocated this domain */
const struct iommu_domain_ops *ops;
unsigned long pgsize_bitmap; /* Bitmap of page sizes in use */
iommu_fault_handler_t handler;
\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2022-06-06 19:52    [W:0.086 / U:1.668 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site