linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v7 03/10] iommu/sva: Add iommu_sva

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: <d269d0b1-2e08-d469-0e32-2b042cd79bbd@linux.intel.com>
Date:   Fri, 20 May 2022 12:55:41 +0800
From:   Baolu Lu <baolu.lu@...ux.intel.com>
To:     Jean-Philippe Brucker <jean-philippe@...aro.org>
Cc:     baolu.lu@...ux.intel.com, Joerg Roedel <joro@...tes.org>,
        Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@...dia.com>,
        Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>,
        Kevin Tian <kevin.tian@...el.com>,
        Ashok Raj <ashok.raj@...el.com>, Will Deacon <will@...nel.org>,
        Robin Murphy <robin.murphy@....com>,
        Jean-Philippe Brucker <jean-philippe@...aro.com>,
        Dave Jiang <dave.jiang@...el.com>,
        Vinod Koul <vkoul@...nel.org>,
        Eric Auger <eric.auger@...hat.com>,
        Liu Yi L <yi.l.liu@...el.com>,
        Jacob jun Pan <jacob.jun.pan@...el.com>,
        iommu@...ts.linux-foundation.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v7 03/10] iommu/sva: Add iommu_sva_domain support

On 2022/5/20 00:33, Jean-Philippe Brucker wrote:
>> diff --git a/drivers/iommu/iommu-sva-lib.h b/drivers/iommu/iommu-sva-lib.h
>> index 8909ea1094e3..1be21e6b93ec 100644
>> --- a/drivers/iommu/iommu-sva-lib.h
>> +++ b/drivers/iommu/iommu-sva-lib.h
>> @@ -7,6 +7,7 @@
>>   
>>   #include <linux/ioasid.h>
>>   #include <linux/mm_types.h>
>> +#include <linux/iommu.h>
>>   
>>   int iommu_sva_alloc_pasid(struct mm_struct *mm, ioasid_t min, ioasid_t max);
>>   struct mm_struct *iommu_sva_find(ioasid_t pasid);
>> @@ -16,6 +17,20 @@ struct device;
>>   struct iommu_fault;
>>   struct iopf_queue;
>>   
>> +struct iommu_sva_domain {
>> +	struct iommu_domain	domain;
>> +	struct mm_struct	*mm;
>> +};
>> +
>> +#define to_sva_domain(d) container_of_safe(d, struct iommu_sva_domain, domain)
> Is there a reason to use the 'safe' version of container_of()?  Callers of
> to_sva_domain() don't check the return value before dereferencing it so
> they would break anyway if someone passes an error pointer as domain.  I
> think it matters because there is no other user of container_of_safe() in
> the kernel (the only user, lustre, went away in 2018) so someone will want
> to remove it.

Fair enough. I wondered why there's no user in the tree. Thanks for the
explanation. I will replace it with container_of().

> 
> Apart from that
> 
> Reviewed-by: Jean-Philippe Brucker<jean-philippe@...aro.org>
> 

Thank you!

Best regards,
baolu