linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v10 04/11] drm/i915/gem: selftest should not attempt mmap of private regions

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: <68231920-8eef-1e10-df40-ac8cd0dd0802@intel.com>
Date:   Fri, 8 Jul 2022 14:27:14 +0100
From:   Matthew Auld <matthew.auld@...el.com>
To:     Robert Beckett <bob.beckett@...labora.com>,
        dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org, intel-gfx@...ts.freedesktop.org,
        Jani Nikula <jani.nikula@...ux.intel.com>,
        Joonas Lahtinen <joonas.lahtinen@...ux.intel.com>,
        Rodrigo Vivi <rodrigo.vivi@...el.com>,
        Tvrtko Ursulin <tvrtko.ursulin@...ux.intel.com>,
        David Airlie <airlied@...ux.ie>,
        Daniel Vetter <daniel@...ll.ch>
Cc:     Thomas Hellström 
        <thomas.hellstrom@...ux.intel.com>, kernel@...labora.com,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v10 04/11] drm/i915/gem: selftest should not attempt mmap
 of private regions

On 08/07/2022 14:22, Robert Beckett wrote:
> 
> 
> On 08/07/2022 08:53, Matthew Auld wrote:
>> On 07/07/2022 21:02, Robert Beckett wrote:
>>> During testing make can_mmap consider whether the region is private.
>>
>> Do we still need this with: 938d2fd17d17 ("drm/i915/selftests: skip 
>> the mman tests for stolen") ?
> 
> huh, I guess not. That wasn't in my tree. I guess I should rebase.
> 
> Looking at it, my patch would have been preferable initially I think. 
> Each location of the additional checks in that patch first call 
> cam_mmap(), which I think is the most appropriate place to make the 
> decision.

It fails at the object_create() I think (on small-BAR I mean), which is 
before we can call can_mmap(), passing in the object.

> 
> I could do a replacement patch that reverts that one if preferred, or we 
> can leave it as is and I will drop this patch.
> 
> 
>>
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Robert Beckett <bob.beckett@...labora.com>
>>> Reviewed-by: Thomas Hellström <thomas.hellstrom@...ux.intel.com>
>>> ---
>>>   drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gem/selftests/i915_gem_mman.c | 3 +++
>>>   1 file changed, 3 insertions(+)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gem/selftests/i915_gem_mman.c 
>>> b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gem/selftests/i915_gem_mman.c
>>> index 5bc93a1ce3e3..76181e28c75e 100644
>>> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gem/selftests/i915_gem_mman.c
>>> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gem/selftests/i915_gem_mman.c
>>> @@ -869,6 +869,9 @@ static bool can_mmap(struct drm_i915_gem_object 
>>> *obj, enum i915_mmap_type type)
>>>       struct drm_i915_private *i915 = to_i915(obj->base.dev);
>>>       bool no_map;
>>> +    if (obj->mm.region && obj->mm.region->private)
>>> +        return false;
>>> +
>>>       if (obj->ops->mmap_offset)
>>>           return type == I915_MMAP_TYPE_FIXED;
>>>       else if (type == I915_MMAP_TYPE_FIXED)