linux-kernel - RE: [PATCH v6 05/10] iommufd: Add fault and response message definitions

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: <BN9PR11MB52768F2D79C8FA75280F1FF38CF92@BN9PR11MB5276.namprd11.prod.outlook.com>
Date: Wed, 5 Jun 2024 08:28:52 +0000
From: "Tian, Kevin" <kevin.tian@...el.com>
To: Lu Baolu <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 v6 05/10] iommufd: Add fault and response message
 definitions

> From: Lu Baolu <baolu.lu@...ux.intel.com>
> Sent: Monday, May 27, 2024 12:05 PM
> 
> +
> +/**
> + * struct iommu_hwpt_page_response - IOMMU page fault response
> + * @size: sizeof(struct iommu_hwpt_page_response)
> + * @flags: Must be set to 0
> + * @dev_id: device ID of target device for the response
> + * @pasid: Process Address Space ID
> + * @grpid: Page Request Group Index
> + * @code: One of response code in enum iommufd_page_response_code.
> + * @cookie: The kernel-managed cookie reported in the fault message.
> + */
> +struct iommu_hwpt_page_response {
> +	__u32 size;
> +	__u32 flags;
> +	__u32 dev_id;
> +	__u32 pasid;
> +	__u32 grpid;
> +	__u32 code;
> +	__u32 cookie;
> +	__u32 reserved;
> +};

with the response queue per fault object we don't need all fields here,
e.g. dev_id, pasid, etc. Cookie is sufficient.