linux-kernel - RE: [RFC PATCH 6/6] drm/i915/gvt: support QEMU getting the dmabuf

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]

Date:   Wed, 3 May 2017 01:39:28 +0000
From:   "Chen, Xiaoguang" <xiaoguang.chen@...el.com>
To:     Gerd Hoffmann <kraxel@...hat.com>
CC:     "alex.williamson@...hat.com" <alex.williamson@...hat.com>,
        "intel-gfx@...ts.freedesktop.org" <intel-gfx@...ts.freedesktop.org>,
        "intel-gvt-dev@...ts.freedesktop.org" 
        <intel-gvt-dev@...ts.freedesktop.org>,
        "Wang, Zhi A" <zhi.a.wang@...el.com>,
        "zhenyuw@...ux.intel.com" <zhenyuw@...ux.intel.com>,
        "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        "Lv, Zhiyuan" <zhiyuan.lv@...el.com>,
        "Tian, Kevin" <kevin.tian@...el.com>
Subject: RE: [RFC PATCH 6/6] drm/i915/gvt: support QEMU getting the dmabuf



>-----Original Message-----
>From: Gerd Hoffmann [mailto:kraxel@...hat.com]
>Sent: Tuesday, May 02, 2017 5:51 PM
>To: Chen, Xiaoguang <xiaoguang.chen@...el.com>
>Cc: alex.williamson@...hat.com; intel-gfx@...ts.freedesktop.org; intel-gvt-
>dev@...ts.freedesktop.org; Wang, Zhi A <zhi.a.wang@...el.com>;
>zhenyuw@...ux.intel.com; linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org; Lv, Zhiyuan
><zhiyuan.lv@...el.com>; Tian, Kevin <kevin.tian@...el.com>
>Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 6/6] drm/i915/gvt: support QEMU getting the dmabuf
>
>On Fr, 2017-04-28 at 17:35 +0800, Xiaoguang Chen wrote:
>> +static size_t intel_vgpu_reg_rw_gvtg(struct intel_vgpu *vgpu, char
>> *buf,
>> +               size_t count, loff_t *ppos, bool iswrite) {
>> +       unsigned int i = VFIO_PCI_OFFSET_TO_INDEX(*ppos) -
>> +                       VFIO_PCI_NUM_REGIONS;
>> +       loff_t pos = *ppos & VFIO_PCI_OFFSET_MASK;
>> +       int fd;
>> +
>> +       if (pos >= vgpu->vdev.region[i].size || iswrite) {
>> +               gvt_vgpu_err("invalid op or offset for Intel vgpu fd
>> region\n");
>> +               return -EINVAL;
>> +       }
>> +
>> +       fd = anon_inode_getfd("gvtg", &intel_vgpu_gvtg_ops, vgpu,
>> +                       O_RDWR | O_CLOEXEC);
>> +       if (fd < 0) {
>> +               gvt_vgpu_err("create intel vgpu fd failed:%d\n", fd);
>> +               return -EINVAL;
>> +       }
>> +
>> +       count = min(count, (size_t)(vgpu->vdev.region[i].size - pos));
>> +       memcpy(buf, &fd, count);
>> +
>> +       return count;
>> +}
>
>Hmm, that looks like a rather strange way to return a file descriptor.
>
>What is the reason to not use ioctls on the vfio file handle, like older version of
>these patches did?
If I understood correctly that Alex prefer not to change the ioctls on the vfio file handle like the old version.
So I used this way the smallest change to general vfio framework only adding a subregion definition.

>
>cheers,
>  Gerd