linux-kernel - RE: [PATCH v5 7/9] iommufd: Associate fault object with iommufd_hw

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: <BN9PR11MB5276F07A130CD617777A3AAD8CE92@BN9PR11MB5276.namprd11.prod.outlook.com>
Date: Mon, 20 May 2024 03:39:54 +0000
From: "Tian, Kevin" <kevin.tian@...el.com>
To: Baolu Lu <baolu.lu@...ux.intel.com>, Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@...pe.ca>,
	"Joerg Roedel" <joro@...tes.org>, Will Deacon <will@...nel.org>, Robin Murphy
	<robin.murphy@....com>, Jean-Philippe Brucker <jean-philippe@...aro.org>,
	Nicolin Chen <nicolinc@...dia.com>, "Liu, Yi L" <yi.l.liu@...el.com>, "Jacob
 Pan" <jacob.jun.pan@...ux.intel.com>, Joel Granados <j.granados@...sung.com>
CC: "iommu@...ts.linux.dev" <iommu@...ts.linux.dev>,
	"virtualization@...ts.linux-foundation.org"
	<virtualization@...ts.linux-foundation.org>, "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org"
	<linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: RE: [PATCH v5 7/9] iommufd: Associate fault object with
 iommufd_hw_pgtable

> From: Baolu Lu <baolu.lu@...ux.intel.com>
> Sent: Monday, May 20, 2024 10:19 AM
> 
> On 5/15/24 4:50 PM, Tian, Kevin wrote:
> >> From: Lu Baolu <baolu.lu@...ux.intel.com>
> >> Sent: Tuesday, April 30, 2024 10:57 PM
> >>
> >> @@ -308,6 +314,19 @@ int iommufd_hwpt_alloc(struct iommufd_ucmd
> >> *ucmd)
> >>   		goto out_put_pt;
> >>   	}
> >>
> >> +	if (cmd->flags & IOMMU_HWPT_FAULT_ID_VALID) {
> >> +		struct iommufd_fault *fault;
> >> +
> >> +		fault = iommufd_get_fault(ucmd, cmd->fault_id);
> >> +		if (IS_ERR(fault)) {
> >> +			rc = PTR_ERR(fault);
> >> +			goto out_hwpt;
> >> +		}
> >> +		hwpt->fault = fault;
> >> +		hwpt->domain->iopf_handler = iommufd_fault_iopf_handler;
> >> +		hwpt->domain->fault_data = hwpt;
> >> +	}
> >
> > this is nesting specific. why not moving it to the nested_alloc()?
> 
> Nesting is currently a use case for userspace I/O page faults, but this
> design should be general enough to support other scenarios as well.
> 

Do we allow user page table w/o nesting?

What would be a scenario in which the user doesn't manage the
page table but still want to handle the I/O page fault? The fault
should always be delivered to the owner managing the page table...