| 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
| ||
|
Message-ID: <CAH76GKNWCy-BfoHP=wAEKpP7Wr-Cnni12Zb-zJEJNkr=CPyvzw@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 27 Jun 2023 18:01:04 +0200
From: Grzegorz Jaszczyk <jaz@...ihalf.com>
To: Alex Williamson <alex.williamson@...hat.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, dmy@...ihalf.com, tn@...ihalf.com,
dbehr@...gle.com, dbehr@...omium.org, upstream@...ihalf.com,
dtor@...gle.com, jgg@...pe.ca, kevin.tian@...el.com,
cohuck@...hat.com, abhsahu@...dia.com, yishaih@...dia.com,
yi.l.liu@...el.com, kvm@...r.kernel.org, libvir-list@...hat.com,
pmorel@...ux.ibm.com, borntraeger@...ux.ibm.com,
mjrosato@...ux.ibm.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5] vfio/pci: Propagate ACPI notifications to user-space
via eventfd
pt., 16 cze 2023 o 00:54 Alex Williamson <alex.williamson@...hat.com>
napisał(a):
>
> On Fri, 9 Jun 2023 13:39:50 +0000
> Grzegorz Jaszczyk <jaz@...ihalf.com> wrote:
>
> > To allow pass-through devices receiving ACPI notifications, permit to
> > register ACPI notify handler (via VFIO_DEVICE_SET_IRQS) for a given
> > device. The handler role is to receive and propagate such ACPI
> > notifications to the user-space through the user provided eventfd. This
> > allows VMM to receive and propagate them further to the VM, where the
> > actual driver for pass-through device resides and can react to device
> > specific notifications accordingly.
> >
> > The eventfd usage ensures VMM and device isolation: it allows to use a
> > dedicated channel associated with the device for such events, such that
> > the VMM has direct access.
> >
> > Since the eventfd counter is used as ACPI notification value
> > placeholder, the eventfd signaling needs to be serialized in order to
> > not end up with notification values being coalesced. Therefore ACPI
> > notification values are buffered and signalized one by one, when the
> > previous notification value has been consumed.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Grzegorz Jaszczyk <jaz@...ihalf.com>
> > ---
> > Changelog v4..v5
> > Address Alex Williamson's feedback:
> > - s/vfio_acpi_notify.{c,o}/acpi_notify.{c,o}
> > - Do not put acpi_notify to its own module but fold it into main
> > vfio.ko. Additionally select it from VFIO_PCI_CORE instead of VFIO_PCI.
> > - Cleanup acpi notify under igate mutex (in vfio_pci_core_close_device).
> > - Add extra check for ACPI companion in vfio_pci_get_irq_count and
> > extend vfio_pci_ioctl_get_irq_info.
> > - Drop acpi.h include - linux/vfio_acpi_notify.h includes it already.
> > - Send device check notification value for DATA_NONE and non-zero count
> > and for DATA_BOOL and non-zero count (as for loopback testing).
> > - Drop some redundant !acpi_notify->acpi_notify_trigger checks.
> > - Move some common code to new helper functions:
> > 1) acpi_notification_dequeue
> > 2) vfio_acpi_notify_cleanup and rename previous
> > vfio_acpi_notify_cleanup into vfio_remove_acpi_notify which uses it
> > - Add rate limited logging for dropped notifications.
> > - Move vdev->acpi_notification pointer cleanup to the
> > vfio_acpi_notify_cleanup function this also fixes two bigger issues
> > caught by Alex.
> > - Allow the eventfd to be swapped.
> > - s/GFP_KERNEL/GFP_KERNEL_ACCOUNT.
> > - s/VFIO_PCI_ACPI_NTFY_IRQ_INDEX/VFIO_PCI_ACPI_IRQ_INDEX.
> > - Add header protection for multiple includes.
> > - v4: https://patchwork.kernel.org/project/kvm/patch/20230522165811.123417-1-jaz@semihalf.com/
> >
> > Changelog v3..v4
> > Address Alex Williamson feedback:
> > - Instead of introducing new ioctl used for eventfd registration, take
> > advantage of VFIO_DEVICE_SET_IRQS which already supports virtual IRQs
> > for things like error notification and device release requests.
> > - Introduced mechanism preventing creation of large queues.
> > Other:
> > - Move the implementation into the newly introduced VFIO_ACPI_NOTIFY
> > helper module. It is actually not bound to VFIO_PCI but VFIO_PCI
> > enables it whenever ACPI support is enabled. This change is introduced
> > since ACPI notifications are not limited to PCI devices, making it PCI
> > independent will allow to re-use it also for other VFIO_* like
> > supports: e.g. VFIO_PLATFORM in the future if needed. Moving it out of
> > drivers/vfio/pci/ was also suggested offline.
> > - s/notify_val_next/node
> > - v3: https://patchwork.kernel.org/project/kvm/patch/20230502132700.654528-1-jaszczyk@google.com/
> >
> > Changelog v2..v3:
> > - Fix compilation warnings when building with "W=1"
> >
> > Changelog v1..v2:
> > - The v2 implementation is actually completely different then v1:
> > instead of using acpi netlink events for propagating ACPI
> > notifications to the user space take advantage of eventfd, which can
> > provide better VMM and device isolation: it allows to use a dedicated
> > channel associated with the device for such events, such that the VMM
> > has direct access.
> > - Using eventfd counter as notification value placeholder was suggested
> > in v1 and requires additional serialization logic introduced in v2.
> > - Since the vfio-pci supports non-ACPI platforms address !CONFIG_ACPI
> > case.
> > - v1 discussion: https://patchwork.kernel.org/project/kvm/patch/20230307220553.631069-1-jaz@semihalf.com/
> > ---
> > drivers/vfio/Kconfig | 5 +
> > drivers/vfio/Makefile | 1 +
> > drivers/vfio/acpi_notify.c | 249 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> > drivers/vfio/pci/Kconfig | 1 +
> > drivers/vfio/pci/vfio_pci_core.c | 13 ++
> > drivers/vfio/pci/vfio_pci_intrs.c | 85 ++++++++++
> > include/linux/vfio_acpi_notify.h | 45 ++++++
> > include/linux/vfio_pci_core.h | 1 +
> > include/uapi/linux/vfio.h | 1 +
> > 9 files changed, 401 insertions(+)
> > create mode 100644 drivers/vfio/acpi_notify.c
> > create mode 100644 include/linux/vfio_acpi_notify.h
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/vfio/Kconfig b/drivers/vfio/Kconfig
> > index 89e06c981e43..cd9df43a4eb4 100644
> > --- a/drivers/vfio/Kconfig
> > +++ b/drivers/vfio/Kconfig
> > @@ -12,6 +12,11 @@ menuconfig VFIO
> > If you don't know what to do here, say N.
> >
> > if VFIO
> > +config VFIO_ACPI_NOTIFY
> > + bool
> > + depends on ACPI
> > + default n
> > +
> > config VFIO_CONTAINER
> > bool "Support for the VFIO container /dev/vfio/vfio"
> > select VFIO_IOMMU_TYPE1 if MMU && (X86 || S390 || ARM || ARM64)
> > diff --git a/drivers/vfio/Makefile b/drivers/vfio/Makefile
> > index 70e7dcb302ef..003c2b041785 100644
> > --- a/drivers/vfio/Makefile
> > +++ b/drivers/vfio/Makefile
> > @@ -7,6 +7,7 @@ vfio-y += vfio_main.o \
> > vfio-$(CONFIG_IOMMUFD) += iommufd.o
> > vfio-$(CONFIG_VFIO_CONTAINER) += container.o
> > vfio-$(CONFIG_VFIO_VIRQFD) += virqfd.o
> > +vfio-$(CONFIG_VFIO_ACPI_NOTIFY) += acpi_notify.o
> >
> > obj-$(CONFIG_VFIO_IOMMU_TYPE1) += vfio_iommu_type1.o
> > obj-$(CONFIG_VFIO_IOMMU_SPAPR_TCE) += vfio_iommu_spapr_tce.o
> > diff --git a/drivers/vfio/acpi_notify.c b/drivers/vfio/acpi_notify.c
> > new file mode 100644
> > index 000000000000..8d3f063502fe
> > --- /dev/null
> > +++ b/drivers/vfio/acpi_notify.c
> > @@ -0,0 +1,249 @@
> > +// SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0-only
> > +/*
> > + * VFIO ACPI notification propagation
> > + *
> > + * Author: Grzegorz Jaszczyk <jaz@...ihalf.com>
> > + */
> > +#include <linux/vfio_acpi_notify.h>
> > +
> > +#define NOTIFICATION_QUEUE_SIZE 20
> > +
> > +struct notification_queue {
> > + int notification_val;
> > + struct list_head node;
> > +};
> > +
> > +static int vfio_eventfd_wakeup(wait_queue_entry_t *wait, unsigned int mode,
> > + int sync, void *key)
> > +{
> > + struct vfio_acpi_notification *acpi_notify =
> > + container_of(wait, struct vfio_acpi_notification, wait);
> > + __poll_t flags = key_to_poll(key);
>
> Lockdep annotation would be useful throughout:
>
> lockdep_assert_held(&acpi_notify->notification_lock);
Actually I should change notification_lock to semaphore: please see below.
>
> > +
> > + /*
> > + * eventfd_read signalize EPOLLOUT at the end of its function - this
> > + * means previous eventfd with its notification value was consumed so
> > + * the next notification can be signalized now if pending - schedule
> > + * proper work.
> > + */
> > + if (flags & EPOLLOUT) {
> > + mutex_unlock(&acpi_notify->notification_lock);
> > + schedule_work(&acpi_notify->acpi_notification_work);
> > + }
>
> Shouldn't we also handle EPOLLHUP here? For example, isn't there a
> deadlock if the user configures a notification eventfd, a notification
> fires, the user closes the eventfd without reading it, and then tries
> to swap in a different eventfd ctx?
Indeed, after introducing an eventfd swap mechanism this could deadlock.
I've experimented with the EPOLLHUP handling and I've got to the
conclusion that it requires a bit of code refactoring. First, the
EPOLLHUP will be signalized whenever all handles will be closed: the
eventfd_release, which signalize it, will be triggered only after the
last fput is completed (triggered either by user at the eventfd close
or by the introduced acpi notification mechanism when fput is called).
Additionally fput postpones work to the workqueue (delayed_fput_work)
so triggering fput during eventfd swap does not take immediate effect.
What is more, enabling lockdep made me realize that the mutex has to
be released by the same task which acquires it, so I am going to
convert the notification_lock to semaphore which does not have such a
restriction.
I think that the proper approach will be to separate the entire
eventfd context together with notification_lock from the main
vfio_acpi_notification struct. Thanks to that, during the eventfd
swap, the vfio_acpi_notification will remain (almost) untouched and
will allow to switch entire, separate eventfd ctx and leave the
previous eventfd ctx untouched. The new eventfd will have its separate
notificaiton_lock initialized and will not depend on the previous
eventfd ctx. Additionally when the last handle to old eventfd will be
released and EPOLLHUP triggered, old eventfd ctx will be cleaned-up.
It will probably become more clear when I share the next version.
>
> Having this mutex held indefinitely waiting on the user to poll the
> eventfd looks problematic.
>
> > +
> > + return 0;
> > +}
> > +
> > +static void vfio_ptable_queue_proc(struct file *file,
> > + wait_queue_head_t *wqh, poll_table *pt)
> > +{
> > + struct vfio_acpi_notification *acpi_notify =
> > + container_of(pt, struct vfio_acpi_notification, pt);
> > +
> > + add_wait_queue(wqh, &acpi_notify->wait);
> > +}
> > +
> > +static struct notification_queue *
> > +acpi_notification_dequeue(struct vfio_acpi_notification *acpi_notify)
> > +{
> > + struct notification_queue *oldest_entry;
> > +
>
> lockdep_assert_held(&&acpi_notify->notification_list_lock);
> lockdep_assert_held(&&acpi_notify->notification_lock);
The first one applies but the second does not: the
acpi_notification_dequeue is also called from vfio_acpi_notify when
the notification_lock can be held or not. Additionally
notification_lock needs to be converted to semaphore anyway as
described above.
>
> > + oldest_entry = list_first_entry(&acpi_notify->notification_list,
> > + struct notification_queue,
> > + node);
> > + list_del(&oldest_entry->node);
> > + acpi_notify->notification_queue_count--;
> > +
> > + return oldest_entry;
> > +}
> > +
> > +static void acpi_notification_work_fn(struct work_struct *work)
> > +{
> > + struct vfio_acpi_notification *acpi_notify;
> > + struct notification_queue *entry;
> > +
> > + acpi_notify = container_of(work, struct vfio_acpi_notification,
> > + acpi_notification_work);
> > +
> > + mutex_lock(&acpi_notify->notification_list_lock);
> > + if (list_empty(&acpi_notify->notification_list))
> > + goto out;
> > +
> > + /*
> > + * If the previous eventfd was not yet consumed by user-space lets hold
> > + * on and exit. The notification function will be rescheduled when
> > + * signaling eventfd will be possible (when the EPOLLOUT will be
> > + * signalized and unlocks notify_events).
> > + */
> > + if (!mutex_trylock(&acpi_notify->notification_lock))
> > + goto out;
> > +
> > + entry = acpi_notification_dequeue(acpi_notify);
> > +
> > + mutex_unlock(&acpi_notify->notification_list_lock);
> > +
> > + eventfd_signal(acpi_notify->acpi_notify_trigger, entry->notification_val);
> > +
> > + kfree(entry);
> > +
> > + return;
> > +out:
> > + mutex_unlock(&acpi_notify->notification_list_lock);
> > +}
> > +
> > +static void
> > +vfio_acpi_notify_cleanup(struct vfio_acpi_notification **acpi_notify_ptr,
> > + struct acpi_device *adev)
> > +{
> > + struct vfio_acpi_notification *acpi_notify = *acpi_notify_ptr;
> > + struct notification_queue *entry, *entry_tmp;
> > + u64 cnt;
> > +
> > + eventfd_ctx_remove_wait_queue(acpi_notify->acpi_notify_trigger,
> > + &acpi_notify->wait, &cnt);
> > +
> > + flush_work(&acpi_notify->acpi_notification_work);
>
> At this point we have no idea the state of notification_lock, we'd need
> something like:
>
> if (mutex_trylock(&acpi_notify->notification_lock))
> mutex_unlock(&acpi_notify->notification_lock);
>
> But that is super sketchy.
Before reaching this point we know that acpi_notification_work_fn was
flushed and will not be scheduled again since acpi notify handler is
not installed (vfio_acpi_notify_cleanup is called either in error path
after acpi_install_notify_handler failed or after
acpi_remove_notify_handler completed) and
eventfd_ctx_remove_wait_queue makes sure that we've removed ourselves
from eventfd wqh so vfio_eventfd_wakeup will not be called and we do
not have to worry about notification_lock state at this point.
>
> > +
> > + mutex_lock(&acpi_notify->notification_list_lock);
> > + list_for_each_entry_safe(entry, entry_tmp,
> > + &acpi_notify->notification_list,
> > + node) {
> > + list_del(&entry->node);
> > + kfree(entry);
> > + }
> > + mutex_unlock(&acpi_notify->notification_list_lock);
> > +
> > + eventfd_ctx_put(acpi_notify->acpi_notify_trigger);
> > +
> > + kfree(acpi_notify);
> > +
> > + *acpi_notify_ptr = NULL;
> > +}
> > +
> > +void vfio_acpi_notify(acpi_handle handle, u32 event, void *data)
> > +{
> > + struct vfio_acpi_notification *acpi_notify = (struct vfio_acpi_notification *)data;
> > + struct notification_queue *entry;
> > +
> > + entry = kmalloc(sizeof(*entry), GFP_KERNEL);
> > + if (!entry)
> > + return;
> > +
> > + entry->notification_val = event;
> > + INIT_LIST_HEAD(&entry->node);
> > +
> > + mutex_lock(&acpi_notify->notification_list_lock);
> > + if (acpi_notify->notification_queue_count > NOTIFICATION_QUEUE_SIZE) {
> > + struct notification_queue *oldest_entry =
> > + acpi_notification_dequeue(acpi_notify);
> > +
> > + if (printk_ratelimit())
> > + acpi_handle_warn(handle,
> > + "dropping notification value %d\n",
> > + oldest_entry->notification_val);
> > +
> > + kfree(oldest_entry);
> > + }
> > + list_add_tail(&entry->node, &acpi_notify->notification_list);
> > + acpi_notify->notification_queue_count++;
> > + mutex_unlock(&acpi_notify->notification_list_lock);
> > +
> > + schedule_work(&acpi_notify->acpi_notification_work);
> > +}
> > +EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(vfio_acpi_notify);
> > +
> > +void vfio_remove_acpi_notify(struct vfio_acpi_notification **acpi_notify_ptr,
> > + struct acpi_device *adev)
> > +{
> > + struct vfio_acpi_notification *acpi_notify = *acpi_notify_ptr;
> > +
> > + if (!acpi_notify)
> > + return;
> > +
> > + acpi_remove_notify_handler(adev->handle, ACPI_DEVICE_NOTIFY,
> > + vfio_acpi_notify);
> > +
> > + vfio_acpi_notify_cleanup(acpi_notify_ptr, adev);
> > +}
> > +EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(vfio_remove_acpi_notify);
> > +
> > +int vfio_register_acpi_notify_handler(struct vfio_acpi_notification **acpi_notify_ptr,
> > + struct acpi_device *adev, int32_t fd)
> > +{
> > + struct vfio_acpi_notification *acpi_notify = *acpi_notify_ptr;
> > + struct file *acpi_notify_trigger_file;
> > + struct eventfd_ctx *efdctx;
> > + acpi_status status;
> > +
> > + if (fd < -1)
> > + return -EINVAL;
> > + else if (fd == -1) {
> > + vfio_remove_acpi_notify(acpi_notify_ptr, adev);
> > + return 0;
> > + }
> > +
> > + efdctx = eventfd_ctx_fdget(fd);
> > + if (IS_ERR(efdctx))
> > + return PTR_ERR(efdctx);
> > +
> > + /* Allow eventfd to be swapped */
> > + if (acpi_notify) {
> > + u64 cnt;
> > +
> > + acpi_notify_trigger_file = eventfd_fget(fd);
>
> Where's the fput() for any of these eventfd_fget() calls?
Right, I will need to add it in the proper place.
>
> > +
> > + mutex_lock(&acpi_notify->notification_lock);
>
> A pending signal deadlocks here.
Right. After adding EPOLLHUP handling and reworking code as described
earlier, the mutex_lock will change to sema_init on dedicated per
eventfd ctx notification_lock (actually renamed to notification_sem or
something like that).
>
> > + eventfd_ctx_remove_wait_queue(acpi_notify->acpi_notify_trigger,
> > + &acpi_notify->wait, &cnt);
> > + eventfd_ctx_put(acpi_notify->acpi_notify_trigger);
> > + acpi_notify->acpi_notify_trigger = efdctx;
> > + vfs_poll(acpi_notify_trigger_file, &acpi_notify->pt);
> > + mutex_unlock(&acpi_notify->notification_lock);
> > +
> > + /*
> > + * The ACPI notifications could arrive and be queued during
> > + * eventfd swap, retrigger the worker after notification
> > + * replication unlocking.
> > + */
> > + schedule_work(&acpi_notify->acpi_notification_work);
> > +
> > + return 0;
> > + }
> > +
> > + acpi_notify = kzalloc(sizeof(*acpi_notify), GFP_KERNEL_ACCOUNT);
> > + if (!acpi_notify)
> > + return -ENOMEM;
> > +
> > + *acpi_notify_ptr = acpi_notify;
> > +
> > + INIT_WORK(&acpi_notify->acpi_notification_work, acpi_notification_work_fn);
> > + INIT_LIST_HEAD(&acpi_notify->notification_list);
> > +
> > + acpi_notify->acpi_notify_trigger = efdctx;
> > +
> > + mutex_init(&acpi_notify->notification_lock);
> > +
> > + /*
> > + * Install custom wake-up handler to be notified whenever underlying
> > + * eventfd is consumed by the user-space.
> > + */
> > + init_waitqueue_func_entry(&acpi_notify->wait, vfio_eventfd_wakeup);
> > + init_poll_funcptr(&acpi_notify->pt, vfio_ptable_queue_proc);
> > +
> > + acpi_notify_trigger_file = eventfd_fget(fd);
> > + vfs_poll(acpi_notify_trigger_file, &acpi_notify->pt);
> > +
> > + status = acpi_install_notify_handler(adev->handle, ACPI_DEVICE_NOTIFY,
> > + vfio_acpi_notify, (void *)acpi_notify);
> > + if (ACPI_FAILURE(status)) {
> > + dev_err(&adev->dev, "Failed to install notify handler: %s",
> > + acpi_format_exception(status));
> > +
> > + vfio_acpi_notify_cleanup(acpi_notify_ptr, adev);
> > +
> > + return -ENODEV;
> > + }
> > +
> > + return 0;
> > +}
> > +EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(vfio_register_acpi_notify_handler);
> > diff --git a/drivers/vfio/pci/Kconfig b/drivers/vfio/pci/Kconfig
> > index f9d0c908e738..f03ca773dfd9 100644
> > --- a/drivers/vfio/pci/Kconfig
> > +++ b/drivers/vfio/pci/Kconfig
> > @@ -4,6 +4,7 @@ config VFIO_PCI_CORE
> > tristate
> > select VFIO_VIRQFD
> > select IRQ_BYPASS_MANAGER
> > + select VFIO_ACPI_NOTIFY if ACPI
> >
> > config VFIO_PCI_MMAP
> > def_bool y if !S390
> > diff --git a/drivers/vfio/pci/vfio_pci_core.c b/drivers/vfio/pci/vfio_pci_core.c
> > index a5ab416cf476..1cc4a9c05403 100644
> > --- a/drivers/vfio/pci/vfio_pci_core.c
> > +++ b/drivers/vfio/pci/vfio_pci_core.c
> > @@ -27,6 +27,7 @@
> > #include <linux/vgaarb.h>
> > #include <linux/nospec.h>
> > #include <linux/sched/mm.h>
> > +#include <linux/vfio_acpi_notify.h>
> > #if IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_EEH)
> > #include <asm/eeh.h>
> > #endif
> > @@ -683,6 +684,7 @@ void vfio_pci_core_close_device(struct vfio_device *core_vdev)
> > {
> > struct vfio_pci_core_device *vdev =
> > container_of(core_vdev, struct vfio_pci_core_device, vdev);
> > + struct acpi_device *adev = ACPI_COMPANION(&vdev->pdev->dev);
> >
> > if (vdev->sriov_pf_core_dev) {
> > mutex_lock(&vdev->sriov_pf_core_dev->vf_token->lock);
> > @@ -704,6 +706,8 @@ void vfio_pci_core_close_device(struct vfio_device *core_vdev)
> > eventfd_ctx_put(vdev->req_trigger);
> > vdev->req_trigger = NULL;
> > }
> > + if (adev)
> > + vfio_remove_acpi_notify(&vdev->acpi_notification, adev);
> > mutex_unlock(&vdev->igate);
> > }
> > EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(vfio_pci_core_close_device);
> > @@ -725,6 +729,8 @@ EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(vfio_pci_core_finish_enable);
> >
> > static int vfio_pci_get_irq_count(struct vfio_pci_core_device *vdev, int irq_type)
> > {
> > + struct acpi_device *adev = ACPI_COMPANION(&vdev->pdev->dev);
> > +
> > if (irq_type == VFIO_PCI_INTX_IRQ_INDEX) {
> > u8 pin;
> >
> > @@ -761,6 +767,8 @@ static int vfio_pci_get_irq_count(struct vfio_pci_core_device *vdev, int irq_typ
> > return 1;
> > } else if (irq_type == VFIO_PCI_REQ_IRQ_INDEX) {
> > return 1;
> > + } else if (adev && irq_type == VFIO_PCI_ACPI_IRQ_INDEX) {
> > + return 1;
> > }
> >
> > return 0;
> > @@ -1084,6 +1092,7 @@ static int vfio_pci_ioctl_get_irq_info(struct vfio_pci_core_device *vdev,
> > struct vfio_irq_info __user *arg)
> > {
> > unsigned long minsz = offsetofend(struct vfio_irq_info, count);
> > + struct acpi_device *adev = ACPI_COMPANION(&vdev->pdev->dev);
> > struct vfio_irq_info info;
> >
> > if (copy_from_user(&info, arg, minsz))
> > @@ -1096,6 +1105,10 @@ static int vfio_pci_ioctl_get_irq_info(struct vfio_pci_core_device *vdev,
> > case VFIO_PCI_INTX_IRQ_INDEX ... VFIO_PCI_MSIX_IRQ_INDEX:
> > case VFIO_PCI_REQ_IRQ_INDEX:
> > break;
> > + case VFIO_PCI_ACPI_IRQ_INDEX:
> > + if (adev)
> > + break;
> > + return -EINVAL;
> > case VFIO_PCI_ERR_IRQ_INDEX:
> > if (pci_is_pcie(vdev->pdev))
> > break;
> > diff --git a/drivers/vfio/pci/vfio_pci_intrs.c b/drivers/vfio/pci/vfio_pci_intrs.c
> > index bffb0741518b..410f517f8b2c 100644
> > --- a/drivers/vfio/pci/vfio_pci_intrs.c
> > +++ b/drivers/vfio/pci/vfio_pci_intrs.c
> > @@ -19,6 +19,7 @@
> > #include <linux/vfio.h>
> > #include <linux/wait.h>
> > #include <linux/slab.h>
> > +#include <linux/vfio_acpi_notify.h>
> >
> > #include "vfio_pci_priv.h"
> >
> > @@ -667,6 +668,76 @@ static int vfio_pci_set_req_trigger(struct vfio_pci_core_device *vdev,
> > count, flags, data);
> > }
> >
> > +static int
> > +vfio_pci_set_acpi_ntfy_trigger(struct vfio_pci_core_device *vdev,
> > + unsigned int index, unsigned int start,
> > + unsigned int count, uint32_t flags, void *data)
> > +{
> > + struct acpi_device *adev = ACPI_COMPANION(&vdev->pdev->dev);
> > + acpi_handle handle;
> > +
> > + if (index != VFIO_PCI_ACPI_IRQ_INDEX || start != 0 || count > 1)
> > + return -EINVAL;
> > +
> > + if (!adev)
> > + return -ENODEV;
> > +
> > + if (!vdev->acpi_notification)
> > + return -EINVAL;
> > +
> > +#if IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_ACPI)
> > + handle = adev->handle;
> > +#endif
>
> Seems this is only needed because vfio_acpi_notify() takes an
> acpi_handle, why didn't we use the solution from
> vfio_remove_acpi_notify() and pass the whole adev? vfio_acpi_notify()
> could also return int and pass back an -ENOMEM since we've got the
> return path. Thanks,
The vfio_acpi_notify is used for acpi notification handler
registration which enforces the function type:
typedef void (*acpi_notify_handler) (acpi_handle device, u32 value,
void *context);
Although I can convert vfio_acpi_notify to a static function and add a
wrapper around it which takes the adev and gets rid of
IS_ENABLE(CONFIG_ACPI).
Thank you for review,
Grzegorz
>
> Alex
>
> > +
> > + /*
> > + * Disable notifications: flags = (DATA_NONE|ACTION_TRIGGER), count = 0
> > + * Enable loopback testing: (DATA_BOOL|ACTION_TRIGGER) or
> > + * (DATA_NONE|ACTION_TRIGGER), count != 0
> > + */
> > + if (flags & VFIO_IRQ_SET_DATA_NONE) {
> > + if (count)
> > + vfio_acpi_notify(handle, ACPI_NOTIFY_DEVICE_CHECK,
> > + vdev->acpi_notification);
> > + else
> > + vfio_remove_acpi_notify(&vdev->acpi_notification, adev);
> > +
> > + return 0;
> > + } else if (flags & VFIO_IRQ_SET_DATA_BOOL) {
> > + uint8_t trigger;
> > +
> > + if (!count)
> > + return -EINVAL;
> > +
> > + trigger = *(uint8_t *)data;
> > + if (trigger)
> > + vfio_acpi_notify(handle, ACPI_NOTIFY_DEVICE_CHECK,
> > + vdev->acpi_notification);
> > +
> > + return 0;
> > + }
> > +
> > + return -EINVAL;
> > +}
> > +
> > +static int
> > +vfio_pci_set_acpi_ntfy_eventfd_trigger(struct vfio_pci_core_device *vdev,
> > + unsigned int index, unsigned int start,
> > + unsigned int count, uint32_t flags, void *data)
> > +{
> > + struct acpi_device *adev = ACPI_COMPANION(&vdev->pdev->dev);
> > + int32_t fd;
> > +
> > + if (index != VFIO_PCI_ACPI_IRQ_INDEX || start != 0 || count != 1)
> > + return -EINVAL;
> > +
> > + if (!adev)
> > + return -ENODEV;
> > +
> > + fd = *(int32_t *)data;
> > +
> > + return vfio_register_acpi_notify_handler(&vdev->acpi_notification, adev, fd);
> > +}
> > +
> > int vfio_pci_set_irqs_ioctl(struct vfio_pci_core_device *vdev, uint32_t flags,
> > unsigned index, unsigned start, unsigned count,
> > void *data)
> > @@ -716,6 +787,20 @@ int vfio_pci_set_irqs_ioctl(struct vfio_pci_core_device *vdev, uint32_t flags,
> > break;
> > }
> > break;
> > + case VFIO_PCI_ACPI_IRQ_INDEX:
> > + switch (flags & VFIO_IRQ_SET_ACTION_TYPE_MASK) {
> > + case VFIO_IRQ_SET_ACTION_TRIGGER:
> > + switch (flags & VFIO_IRQ_SET_DATA_TYPE_MASK) {
> > + case VFIO_IRQ_SET_DATA_BOOL:
> > + case VFIO_IRQ_SET_DATA_NONE:
> > + func = vfio_pci_set_acpi_ntfy_trigger;
> > + break;
> > + case VFIO_IRQ_SET_DATA_EVENTFD:
> > + func = vfio_pci_set_acpi_ntfy_eventfd_trigger;
> > + break;
> > + }
> > + }
> > + break;
> > }
> >
> > if (!func)
> > diff --git a/include/linux/vfio_acpi_notify.h b/include/linux/vfio_acpi_notify.h
> > new file mode 100644
> > index 000000000000..4bf1d055a014
> > --- /dev/null
> > +++ b/include/linux/vfio_acpi_notify.h
> > @@ -0,0 +1,45 @@
> > +/* SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0-only */
> > +/*
> > + * VFIO ACPI notification replication
> > + *
> > + * Author: Grzegorz Jaszczyk <jaz@...ihalf.com>
> > + */
> > +#include <linux/acpi.h>
> > +#include <linux/eventfd.h>
> > +#include <linux/poll.h>
> > +
> > +#ifndef VFIO_ACPI_NOTIFY_H
> > +#define VFIO_ACPI_NOTIFY_H
> > +
> > +struct vfio_acpi_notification {
> > + struct eventfd_ctx *acpi_notify_trigger;
> > + struct work_struct acpi_notification_work;
> > + struct list_head notification_list;
> > + struct mutex notification_list_lock;
> > + struct mutex notification_lock;
> > + int notification_queue_count;
> > + poll_table pt;
> > + wait_queue_entry_t wait;
> > +};
> > +
> > +#if IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_ACPI)
> > +void vfio_acpi_notify(acpi_handle handle, u32 event, void *data);
> > +int vfio_register_acpi_notify_handler(struct vfio_acpi_notification **acpi_notify,
> > + struct acpi_device *adev, int32_t fd);
> > +void vfio_remove_acpi_notify(struct vfio_acpi_notification **acpi_notify,
> > + struct acpi_device *adev);
> > +#else
> > +static inline void vfio_acpi_notify(acpi_handle handle, u32 event, void *data) {}
> > +static inline int
> > +vfio_register_acpi_notify_handler(struct vfio_acpi_notification **acpi_notify,
> > + struct acpi_device *adev, int32_t fd)
> > +{
> > + return -ENODEV;
> > +}
> > +
> > +static inline void
> > +vfio_remove_acpi_notify(struct vfio_acpi_notification **acpi_notify,
> > + struct acpi_device *adev) {}
> > +#endif /* CONFIG_ACPI */
> > +
> > +#endif /* VFIO_ACPI_NOTIFY_H */
> > diff --git a/include/linux/vfio_pci_core.h b/include/linux/vfio_pci_core.h
> > index 367fd79226a3..a4491b3d8064 100644
> > --- a/include/linux/vfio_pci_core.h
> > +++ b/include/linux/vfio_pci_core.h
> > @@ -96,6 +96,7 @@ struct vfio_pci_core_device {
> > struct mutex vma_lock;
> > struct list_head vma_list;
> > struct rw_semaphore memory_lock;
> > + struct vfio_acpi_notification *acpi_notification;
> > };
> >
> > /* Will be exported for vfio pci drivers usage */
> > diff --git a/include/uapi/linux/vfio.h b/include/uapi/linux/vfio.h
> > index 0552e8dcf0cb..6b20ef3d202c 100644
> > --- a/include/uapi/linux/vfio.h
> > +++ b/include/uapi/linux/vfio.h
> > @@ -625,6 +625,7 @@ enum {
> > VFIO_PCI_MSIX_IRQ_INDEX,
> > VFIO_PCI_ERR_IRQ_INDEX,
> > VFIO_PCI_REQ_IRQ_INDEX,
> > + VFIO_PCI_ACPI_IRQ_INDEX,
> > VFIO_PCI_NUM_IRQS
> > };
> >
>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists