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: <aBAQdq0jeoCdKdsC@Asurada-Nvidia>
Date: Mon, 28 Apr 2025 16:34:14 -0700
From: Nicolin Chen <nicolinc@...dia.com>
To: Pranjal Shrivastava <praan@...gle.com>
CC: <jgg@...dia.com>, <kevin.tian@...el.com>, <corbet@....net>,
	<will@...nel.org>, <bagasdotme@...il.com>, <robin.murphy@....com>,
	<joro@...tes.org>, <thierry.reding@...il.com>, <vdumpa@...dia.com>,
	<jonathanh@...dia.com>, <shuah@...nel.org>, <jsnitsel@...hat.com>,
	<nathan@...nel.org>, <peterz@...radead.org>, <yi.l.liu@...el.com>,
	<mshavit@...gle.com>, <zhangzekun11@...wei.com>, <iommu@...ts.linux.dev>,
	<linux-doc@...r.kernel.org>, <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	<linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>, <linux-tegra@...r.kernel.org>,
	<linux-kselftest@...r.kernel.org>, <patches@...ts.linux.dev>,
	<mochs@...dia.com>, <alok.a.tiwari@...cle.com>, <vasant.hegde@....com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 08/22] iommufd: Abstract iopt_pin_pages and
 iopt_unpin_pages helpers

On Mon, Apr 28, 2025 at 03:12:33PM -0700, Nicolin Chen wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 28, 2025 at 08:14:19PM +0000, Pranjal Shrivastava wrote:
> > On Fri, Apr 25, 2025 at 10:58:03PM -0700, Nicolin Chen wrote:
> > > +	iopt_for_each_contig_area(&iter, area, iopt, iova, last_iova) {
> > > +		unsigned long last = min(last_iova, iopt_area_last_iova(area));
> > > +		unsigned long last_index = iopt_area_iova_to_index(area, last);
> > > +		unsigned long index =
> > > +			iopt_area_iova_to_index(area, iter.cur_iova);
> > > +
> > > +		if (area->prevent_access ||
> > 
> > Nit:
> > Shouldn't we return -EBUSY or something if (area->prevent_access == 1) ?
> > IIUC, this just means that an unmap attempt is in progress, hence avoid
> > accessing the area.
> 
> Maybe. But this is what it was. So we need a different patch to
> change that.

Rereading the code. The prevent_access is set by an unmap(), which
means there shouldn't be any pin() and rw() as the caller should
finish unmap() first.

In the newer use case of vCMDQ, it's similar. If VMM is unmapping
the stage-2 mapping, it shouldn't try to allocate a vCMDQ.

-EBUSY makes some sense, but -EINVAL could still stand.

So, I am leaving it as is, since this patch is just about moving
the functions for sharing.

Nicolin

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ