[<prev] [next>] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20201028091356.GB2328726@myrica>
Date: Wed, 28 Oct 2020 10:13:56 +0100
From: Jean-Philippe Brucker <jean-philippe@...aro.org>
To: Yi Sun <yi.y.sun@...ux.intel.com>
Cc: joro@...tes.org, dwmw2@...radead.org, baolu.lu@...ux.intel.com,
iommu@...ts.linux-foundation.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v1 2/3] iommu: Fix an issue in iommu_page_response()
flags check
Hi,
On Wed, Oct 28, 2020 at 09:36:57AM +0800, Yi Sun wrote:
> From: Jacob Pan <jacob.jun.pan@...ux.intel.com>
>
> original code fails when LAST_PAGE is set in flags.
LAST_PAGE is not documented to be a valid flags for page_response.
So isn't failing the right thing to do?
>
> Signed-off-by: Jacob Pan <jacob.jun.pan@...ux.intel.com>
> Signed-off-by: Liu Yi L <yi.l.liu@...el.com>
> Signed-off-by: Yi Sun <yi.y.sun@...ux.intel.com>
> ---
> drivers/iommu/iommu.c | 6 ++++--
> 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/iommu/iommu.c b/drivers/iommu/iommu.c
> index 8c470f4..053cec3 100644
> --- a/drivers/iommu/iommu.c
> +++ b/drivers/iommu/iommu.c
> @@ -1200,9 +1200,11 @@ int iommu_page_response(struct device *dev,
> return -EINVAL;
>
> if (msg->version != IOMMU_PAGE_RESP_VERSION_1 ||
> - msg->flags & ~IOMMU_PAGE_RESP_PASID_VALID)
> + !(msg->flags & IOMMU_PAGE_RESP_PASID_VALID)) {
It should be OK not to have PASID_VALID set, we're just checking for
undefined flags here.
Thanks,
Jean
> + dev_warn_ratelimited(dev, "%s:Invalid ver %x: flags %x\n",
> + __func__, msg->version, msg->flags);
> return -EINVAL;
> -
> + }
> /* Only send response if there is a fault report pending */
> mutex_lock(¶m->fault_param->lock);
> if (list_empty(¶m->fault_param->faults)) {
> --
> 2.7.4
>
> _______________________________________________
> iommu mailing list
> iommu@...ts.linux-foundation.org
> https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/iommu
Powered by blists - more mailing lists