| 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
| ||
|
Message-ID: <596bba39-0bfc-d98c-efb2-ef1768ee3799@oss.nxp.com>
Date: Mon, 7 Sep 2020 17:38:54 +0300
From: Diana Craciun OSS <diana.craciun@....nxp.com>
To: Auger Eric <eric.auger@...hat.com>, alex.williamson@...hat.com,
kvm@...r.kernel.org
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, bharatb.linux@...il.com,
laurentiu.tudor@....com, Bharat Bhushan <Bharat.Bhushan@....com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 02/10] vfio/fsl-mc: Scan DPRC objects on vfio-fsl-mc
driver bind
Hi Eric,
On 9/3/2020 5:06 PM, Auger Eric wrote:
> Hi Diana,
>
> On 8/26/20 11:33 AM, Diana Craciun wrote:
>> The DPRC (Data Path Resource Container) device is a bus device and has
>> child devices attached to it. When the vfio-fsl-mc driver is probed
>> the DPRC is scanned and the child devices discovered and initialized.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Bharat Bhushan <Bharat.Bhushan@....com>
>> Signed-off-by: Diana Craciun <diana.craciun@....nxp.com>
>> ---
>> drivers/vfio/fsl-mc/vfio_fsl_mc.c | 84 +++++++++++++++++++++++
>> drivers/vfio/fsl-mc/vfio_fsl_mc_private.h | 1 +
>> 2 files changed, 85 insertions(+)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/vfio/fsl-mc/vfio_fsl_mc.c b/drivers/vfio/fsl-mc/vfio_fsl_mc.c
>> index 8b53c2a25b32..85e007be3a5d 100644
>> --- a/drivers/vfio/fsl-mc/vfio_fsl_mc.c
>> +++ b/drivers/vfio/fsl-mc/vfio_fsl_mc.c
>> @@ -15,6 +15,8 @@
>>
>> #include "vfio_fsl_mc_private.h"
>>
>> +static struct fsl_mc_driver vfio_fsl_mc_driver;
>> +
>> static int vfio_fsl_mc_open(void *device_data)
>> {
>> if (!try_module_get(THIS_MODULE))
>> @@ -84,6 +86,72 @@ static const struct vfio_device_ops vfio_fsl_mc_ops = {
>> .mmap = vfio_fsl_mc_mmap,
>> };
>>
>> +static int vfio_fsl_mc_bus_notifier(struct notifier_block *nb,
>> + unsigned long action, void *data)
>> +{
>> + struct vfio_fsl_mc_device *vdev = container_of(nb,
>> + struct vfio_fsl_mc_device, nb);
>> + struct device *dev = data;
>> + struct fsl_mc_device *mc_dev = to_fsl_mc_device(dev);
>> + struct fsl_mc_device *mc_cont = to_fsl_mc_device(mc_dev->dev.parent);
>> +
>> + if (action == BUS_NOTIFY_ADD_DEVICE &&
>> + vdev->mc_dev == mc_cont) {
>> + mc_dev->driver_override = kasprintf(GFP_KERNEL, "%s",
>> + vfio_fsl_mc_ops.name);
>> + if (!mc_dev->driver_override)
>> + dev_warn(dev, "Setting driver override for device in dprc %s failed\n",
>> + dev_name(&mc_cont->dev));
>> + dev_info(dev, "Setting driver override for device in dprc %s\n",
>> + dev_name(&mc_cont->dev));
> Don't you miss an else here?
>> + } else if (action == BUS_NOTIFY_BOUND_DRIVER &&
>> + vdev->mc_dev == mc_cont) {
>> + struct fsl_mc_driver *mc_drv = to_fsl_mc_driver(dev->driver);
>> +
>> + if (mc_drv && mc_drv != &vfio_fsl_mc_driver)
>> + dev_warn(dev, "Object %s bound to driver %s while DPRC bound to vfio-fsl-mc\n",
>> + dev_name(dev), mc_drv->driver.name);
>> + }
>> +
>> + return 0;
>> +}
>> +
>> +static int vfio_fsl_mc_init_device(struct vfio_fsl_mc_device *vdev)
>> +{
>> + struct fsl_mc_device *mc_dev = vdev->mc_dev;
>> + int ret;
>> +
>> + /* Non-dprc devices share mc_io from parent */
>> + if (!is_fsl_mc_bus_dprc(mc_dev)) {
>> + struct fsl_mc_device *mc_cont = to_fsl_mc_device(mc_dev->dev.parent);
>> +
>> + mc_dev->mc_io = mc_cont->mc_io;
>> + return 0;
>> + }
>> +
>> + vdev->nb.notifier_call = vfio_fsl_mc_bus_notifier;
>> + ret = bus_register_notifier(&fsl_mc_bus_type, &vdev->nb);
>> + if (ret)
>> + return ret;
>> +
>> + /* open DPRC, allocate a MC portal */
>> + ret = dprc_setup(mc_dev);
>> + if (ret < 0) {
> if (ret) here and in other places? or are there any > returned values
>> + dev_err(&mc_dev->dev, "Failed to setup DPRC (error = %d)\n", ret);
> nit: maybe align your error messages. Before you were using __func__,
> here you don't. Maybe don't? also you may consider using strerror(-ret)
>> + bus_unregister_notifier(&fsl_mc_bus_type, &vdev->nb);
>> + return ret;
>> + }
>> +
>> + ret = dprc_scan_container(mc_dev, false);
>> + if (ret < 0) {
>> + dev_err(&mc_dev->dev, "Container scanning failed: %d\n", ret);
>> + dprc_cleanup(mc_dev);
> I see dprc_cleanup is likely to fail. Generally cleanup shouldn't.
> https://www.mail-archive.com/linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org/msg2283433.html
Right, I will change the dprc_cleanup not to fail.
>> + bus_unregister_notifier(&fsl_mc_bus_type, &vdev->nb);
> nit: here also you can factorize code doing goto unregister;
> shouldn't you reset vdev->nb.notifier_call to NULL as well. I see it is
> tested in other places.
>> + }
>> +
>> + return ret;
>> +}
>> +
>> static int vfio_fsl_mc_probe(struct fsl_mc_device *mc_dev)
>> {
>> struct iommu_group *group;
>> @@ -112,6 +180,12 @@ static int vfio_fsl_mc_probe(struct fsl_mc_device *mc_dev)
>> return ret;
>> }
>>
>> + ret = vfio_fsl_mc_init_device(vdev);
>> + if (ret < 0) {
> I think you also need to call vfio_del_group_dev(&pdev->dev)
>> + vfio_iommu_group_put(group, dev);
>> + return ret;
> nit: goto put_group;
>> + }
>> +
>> return ret;
>> }
>>
>> @@ -124,6 +198,16 @@ static int vfio_fsl_mc_remove(struct fsl_mc_device *mc_dev)
>> if (!vdev)
>> return -EINVAL;
>>
>> + if (vdev->nb.notifier_call)
>> + bus_unregister_notifier(&fsl_mc_bus_type, &vdev->nb);
>> +
>> + if (is_fsl_mc_bus_dprc(mc_dev)) {
>> + dprc_remove_devices(mc_dev, NULL, 0);
>> + dprc_cleanup(mc_dev);
>> + }
> you may consider doing the tear down in opposite order than
> vfio_fsl_mc_init_device, ie. bus_unregister_notifier after the
> dprc_cleanup? That's also what is done in vfio_fsl_mc_init_device error
> path handling.
>> +
>> + mc_dev->mc_io = NULL;
>> +
>> vfio_iommu_group_put(mc_dev->dev.iommu_group, dev);
>>
>> return 0;
>> diff --git a/drivers/vfio/fsl-mc/vfio_fsl_mc_private.h b/drivers/vfio/fsl-mc/vfio_fsl_mc_private.h
>> index e79cc116f6b8..37d61eaa58c8 100644
>> --- a/drivers/vfio/fsl-mc/vfio_fsl_mc_private.h
>> +++ b/drivers/vfio/fsl-mc/vfio_fsl_mc_private.h
>> @@ -9,6 +9,7 @@
>>
>> struct vfio_fsl_mc_device {
>> struct fsl_mc_device *mc_dev;
>> + struct notifier_block nb;
>> };
>>
>> #endif /* VFIO_FSL_MC_PRIVATE_H */>
> Thanks
>
> Eric
>
Thanks,
Diana
Powered by blists - more mailing lists