linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] KVM: Destroy target device if coalesced MMIO unregistration fails

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]

Date:   Tue, 3 Jan 2023 16:33:39 +0000
From:   Sean Christopherson <seanjc@...gle.com>
To:     "Wang, Wei W" <wei.w.wang@...el.com>
Cc:     Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@...hat.com>,
        "kvm@...r.kernel.org" <kvm@...r.kernel.org>,
        "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        柳菁峰 <liujingfeng@...nxin.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] KVM: Destroy target device if coalesced MMIO
 unregistration fails

On Mon, Dec 26, 2022, Wang, Wei W wrote:
> On Saturday, December 24, 2022 1:14 AM, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> > On 12/20/22 04:04, Wang, Wei W wrote:
> > > Another option is to let kvm_io_bus_unregister_dev handle this, and no
> > > need for callers to make the extra kvm_iodevice_destructor() call.
> > > This simplifies the usage for callers (e.g. reducing LOCs and no leakages like
> > this):
> > 
> > Can you send this as a patch?  Thanks!
> 
> Sure. I can do it. I'm also fine if Sean would be interested in taking over the
> code 

No thanks.

> (or anything I should do to keep his credits for the original fixing?)

No need.  If anything, take my patch first so that the fix for stable kernels is
trivial.  That's Paolo's call though.