[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <BN9PR11MB52764ED1F43F717E04B8E3588CDB9@BN9PR11MB5276.namprd11.prod.outlook.com>
Date: Tue, 7 Feb 2023 06:24:54 +0000
From: "Tian, Kevin" <kevin.tian@...el.com>
To: "Liu, Yi L" <yi.l.liu@...el.com>,
"alex.williamson@...hat.com" <alex.williamson@...hat.com>,
"jgg@...dia.com" <jgg@...dia.com>
CC: "cohuck@...hat.com" <cohuck@...hat.com>,
"eric.auger@...hat.com" <eric.auger@...hat.com>,
"nicolinc@...dia.com" <nicolinc@...dia.com>,
"kvm@...r.kernel.org" <kvm@...r.kernel.org>,
"mjrosato@...ux.ibm.com" <mjrosato@...ux.ibm.com>,
"chao.p.peng@...ux.intel.com" <chao.p.peng@...ux.intel.com>,
"yi.y.sun@...ux.intel.com" <yi.y.sun@...ux.intel.com>,
"peterx@...hat.com" <peterx@...hat.com>,
"jasowang@...hat.com" <jasowang@...hat.com>,
"shameerali.kolothum.thodi@...wei.com"
<shameerali.kolothum.thodi@...wei.com>,
"lulu@...hat.com" <lulu@...hat.com>,
"suravee.suthikulpanit@....com" <suravee.suthikulpanit@....com>,
"intel-gvt-dev@...ts.freedesktop.org"
<intel-gvt-dev@...ts.freedesktop.org>,
"intel-gfx@...ts.freedesktop.org" <intel-gfx@...ts.freedesktop.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-s390@...r.kernel.org" <linux-s390@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: RE: [PATCH v2 11/14] vfio: Make vfio_device_open() exclusive between
group path and device cdev path
> From: Liu, Yi L <yi.l.liu@...el.com>
> Sent: Monday, February 6, 2023 5:05 PM
>
> struct vfio_device_file *
> -vfio_allocate_device_file(struct vfio_device *device)
> +vfio_allocate_device_file(struct vfio_device *device, bool is_cdev_device)
> {
> struct vfio_device_file *df;
>
> @@ -407,6 +407,7 @@ vfio_allocate_device_file(struct vfio_device *device)
> return ERR_PTR(-ENOMEM);
>
> df->device = device;
> + df->is_cdev_device = is_cdev_device;
You missed Alex's comment that the one caller can open code the
assignment instead of introducing an unmemorable Boolean arg here.
>
> + /*
> + * Device cdev path cannot support multiple device open since
> + * it doesn't have a secure way for it. So a second device
> + * open attempt should be failed if the caller is from a cdev
> + * path or the device has already been opened by a cdev path.
> + */
> + if (device->open_count != 0 &&
> + (df->is_cdev_device || device->single_open))
> + return -EINVAL;
> +
If we are gonna handle the exclusive open via dma ownership, then
here we don't need a new single_open flag inside vfio_device since
only one interface (cdev or group) could be used to open this device.
Just preventing multi-open in cdev is sufficient here.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists