[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20190411184741.27540-7-tmurphy@arista.com>
Date: Thu, 11 Apr 2019 19:47:35 +0100
From: Tom Murphy <tmurphy@...sta.com>
To: iommu@...ts.linux-foundation.org
Cc: dima@...sta.com, jamessewart@...sta.com, murphyt7@....ie,
Tom Murphy <tmurphy@...sta.com>,
Joerg Roedel <joro@...tes.org>,
Will Deacon <will.deacon@....com>,
Robin Murphy <robin.murphy@....com>,
Marek Szyprowski <m.szyprowski@...sung.com>,
Kukjin Kim <kgene@...nel.org>,
Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@...nel.org>,
Matthias Brugger <matthias.bgg@...il.com>,
Andy Gross <andy.gross@...aro.org>,
David Brown <david.brown@...aro.org>,
Rob Clark <robdclark@...il.com>,
Heiko Stuebner <heiko@...ech.de>,
Marc Zyngier <marc.zyngier@....com>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
linux-samsung-soc@...r.kernel.org,
linux-mediatek@...ts.infradead.org, linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org,
linux-rockchip@...ts.infradead.org
Subject: [PATCH 6/9] iommu/amd: Implement map_atomic
Instead of using a spin lock I removed the mutex lock from both the
amd_iommu_map and amd_iommu_unmap path as well. iommu_map doesn’t lock
while mapping and so if iommu_map is called by two different threads on
the same iova region it results in a race condition even with the locks.
So the locking in amd_iommu_map and amd_iommu_unmap doesn't add any real
protection. The solution to this is for whatever manages the allocated
iova’s externally to make sure iommu_map isn’t called twice on the same
region at the same time.
Signed-off-by: Tom Murphy <tmurphy@...sta.com>
---
drivers/iommu/amd_iommu.c | 25 ++++++++++++++++++-------
1 file changed, 18 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/iommu/amd_iommu.c b/drivers/iommu/amd_iommu.c
index 2d4ee10626b4..b45e0e033adc 100644
--- a/drivers/iommu/amd_iommu.c
+++ b/drivers/iommu/amd_iommu.c
@@ -3089,12 +3089,12 @@ static int amd_iommu_attach_device(struct iommu_domain *dom,
return ret;
}
-static int amd_iommu_map(struct iommu_domain *dom, unsigned long iova,
- phys_addr_t paddr, size_t page_size, int iommu_prot)
+static int __amd_iommu_map(struct iommu_domain *dom, unsigned long iova,
+ phys_addr_t paddr, size_t page_size, int iommu_prot,
+ gfp_t gfp)
{
struct protection_domain *domain = to_pdomain(dom);
int prot = 0;
- int ret;
if (domain->mode == PAGE_MODE_NONE)
return -EINVAL;
@@ -3104,11 +3104,21 @@ static int amd_iommu_map(struct iommu_domain *dom, unsigned long iova,
if (iommu_prot & IOMMU_WRITE)
prot |= IOMMU_PROT_IW;
- mutex_lock(&domain->api_lock);
- ret = iommu_map_page(domain, iova, paddr, page_size, prot, GFP_KERNEL);
- mutex_unlock(&domain->api_lock);
+ return iommu_map_page(domain, iova, paddr, page_size, prot, gfp);
+}
- return ret;
+static int amd_iommu_map(struct iommu_domain *dom, unsigned long iova,
+ phys_addr_t paddr, size_t page_size, int iommu_prot)
+{
+ return __amd_iommu_map(dom, iova, paddr, page_size, iommu_prot,
+ GFP_KERNEL);
+}
+
+static int amd_iommu_map_atomic(struct iommu_domain *dom, unsigned long iova,
+ phys_addr_t paddr, size_t page_size, int iommu_prot)
+{
+ return __amd_iommu_map(dom, iova, paddr, page_size, iommu_prot,
+ GFP_ATOMIC);
}
static size_t amd_iommu_unmap(struct iommu_domain *dom, unsigned long iova,
@@ -3262,6 +3272,7 @@ const struct iommu_ops amd_iommu_ops = {
.attach_dev = amd_iommu_attach_device,
.detach_dev = amd_iommu_detach_device,
.map = amd_iommu_map,
+ .map_atomic = amd_iommu_map_atomic,
.unmap = amd_iommu_unmap,
.iova_to_phys = amd_iommu_iova_to_phys,
.add_device = amd_iommu_add_device,
--
2.17.1
Powered by blists - more mailing lists