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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Fri, 8 Jul 2022 14:31:44 +0100
From:   Robert Beckett <bob.beckett@...labora.com>
To:     Matthew Auld <matthew.auld@...el.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 14:27, Matthew Auld wrote:
> 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.

ah, okay. That makes sense to keep as is then.
I'll drop this patch.
Thanks.

> 
>>
>> 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)