linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v7 09/12] iommu: Make iommu_queue

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: <dfb350c8-b3e3-48ad-86b3-201205521153@linux.intel.com>
Date:   Tue, 5 Dec 2023 20:13:37 +0800
From:   Baolu Lu <baolu.lu@...ux.intel.com>
To:     Yi Liu <yi.l.liu@...el.com>, Joerg Roedel <joro@...tes.org>,
        Will Deacon <will@...nel.org>,
        Robin Murphy <robin.murphy@....com>,
        Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@...pe.ca>,
        Kevin Tian <kevin.tian@...el.com>,
        Jean-Philippe Brucker <jean-philippe@...aro.org>,
        Nicolin Chen <nicolinc@...dia.com>
Cc:     baolu.lu@...ux.intel.com,
        Jacob Pan <jacob.jun.pan@...ux.intel.com>,
        Yan Zhao <yan.y.zhao@...el.com>, iommu@...ts.linux.dev,
        kvm@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v7 09/12] iommu: Make iommu_queue_iopf() more generic

On 2023/12/5 15:13, Yi Liu wrote:
>> @@ -157,8 +173,8 @@ int iommu_queue_iopf(struct iommu_fault *fault, 
>> struct device *dev)
>>       group->dev = dev;
>>       group->last_fault.fault = *fault;
>>       INIT_LIST_HEAD(&group->faults);
>> +    group->domain = domain;
>>       list_add(&group->last_fault.list, &group->faults);
>> -    INIT_WORK(&group->work, iopf_handler);
>>       /* See if we have partial faults for this group */
>>       list_for_each_entry_safe(iopf, next, &iopf_param->partial, list) {
>> @@ -167,9 +183,13 @@ int iommu_queue_iopf(struct iommu_fault *fault, 
>> struct device *dev)
>>               list_move(&iopf->list, &group->faults);
>>       }
>> -    queue_work(iopf_param->queue->wq, &group->work);
>> -    return 0;
>> +    mutex_unlock(&iopf_param->lock);
>> +    ret = domain->iopf_handler(group);
>> +    mutex_lock(&iopf_param->lock);
> 
> After this change, this function (iommu_queue_iopf) does not queue
> anything. Should this function be renamed? Except this, I didn't see
> other problem.

It's renamed in the next patch.

> 
> Reviewed-by:Yi Liu <yi.l.liu@...el.com>

Thank you!

Best regards,
baolu