linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v12 12/22] vfio: Add notifier callback to parent's ops structure of mdev

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <582AD5A1.5050006@intel.com>
Date:   Tue, 15 Nov 2016 17:30:09 +0800
From:   Jike Song <jike.song@...el.com>
To:     Kirti Wankhede <kwankhede@...dia.com>
CC:     alex.williamson@...hat.com, pbonzini@...hat.com, kraxel@...hat.com,
        cjia@...dia.com, qemu-devel@...gnu.org, kvm@...r.kernel.org,
        kevin.tian@...el.com, bjsdjshi@...ux.vnet.ibm.com,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v12 12/22] vfio: Add notifier callback to parent's ops
 structure of mdev

On 11/15/2016 04:11 PM, Kirti Wankhede wrote:
> 
> 
> On 11/15/2016 12:15 PM, Jike Song wrote:
>> On 11/14/2016 11:42 PM, Kirti Wankhede wrote:
>>> Add a notifier calback to parent's ops structure of mdev device so that per
>>> device notifer for vfio module is registered through vfio_mdev module.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Kirti Wankhede <kwankhede@...dia.com>
>>> Signed-off-by: Neo Jia <cjia@...dia.com>
>>> Change-Id: Iafa6f1721aecdd6e50eb93b153b5621e6d29b637
>>> ---
>>>  drivers/vfio/mdev/vfio_mdev.c | 19 +++++++++++++++++++
>>>  include/linux/mdev.h          |  9 +++++++++
>>>  2 files changed, 28 insertions(+)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/drivers/vfio/mdev/vfio_mdev.c b/drivers/vfio/mdev/vfio_mdev.c
>>> index ffc36758cb84..1694b1635607 100644
>>> --- a/drivers/vfio/mdev/vfio_mdev.c
>>> +++ b/drivers/vfio/mdev/vfio_mdev.c
>>> @@ -24,6 +24,15 @@
>>>  #define DRIVER_AUTHOR   "NVIDIA Corporation"
>>>  #define DRIVER_DESC     "VFIO based driver for Mediated device"
>>>  
>>> +static int vfio_mdev_notifier(struct notifier_block *nb, unsigned long action,
>>> +			      void *data)
>>> +{
>>> +	struct mdev_device *mdev = container_of(nb, struct mdev_device, nb);
>>> +	struct parent_device *parent = mdev->parent;
>>> +
>>> +	return parent->ops->notifier(mdev, action, data);
>>> +}
>>> +
>>>  static int vfio_mdev_open(void *device_data)
>>>  {
>>>  	struct mdev_device *mdev = device_data;
>>> @@ -40,6 +49,11 @@ static int vfio_mdev_open(void *device_data)
>>>  	if (ret)
>>>  		module_put(THIS_MODULE);
>>>  
>>> +	if (likely(parent->ops->notifier)) {
>>> +		mdev->nb.notifier_call = vfio_mdev_notifier;
>>> +		if (vfio_register_notifier(&mdev->dev, &mdev->nb))
>>> +			pr_err("Failed to register notifier for mdev\n");
>>> +	}
>>
>> Hi Kirti,
>>
>> Could you please move the notifier registration before parent->ops->open()?
>> as you might know, I'm extending your vfio_register_notifier to also include
>> the attaching/detaching events of vfio_group and kvm.  Basically if vfio_group
>> not attached to any kvm instance, the parent->ops->open() should return -ENODEV
>> to indicate the failure, but to know whether kvm is available in open(), the
>> notifier registration should be earlier.
>>
> 
> Ok. That seem fine to me.
> 

Thanks - and I guess it's also good to move unregister after ->release(),
so that a sequence of register-open-release-unregister guaranteed :)

--
Thanks,
Jike