linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 21/22] iommu/tegra241-cmdqv: Add user-space use support

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: <aBLGUby2dIiYCe7S@Asurada-Nvidia>
Date: Wed, 30 Apr 2025 17:54:41 -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 21/22] iommu/tegra241-cmdqv: Add user-space use support

On Wed, Apr 30, 2025 at 03:39:22PM -0700, Nicolin Chen wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 30, 2025 at 09:59:13PM +0000, Pranjal Shrivastava wrote:
> > >  enum iommu_viommu_type {
> > >  	IOMMU_VIOMMU_TYPE_DEFAULT = 0,
> > >  	IOMMU_VIOMMU_TYPE_ARM_SMMUV3 = 1,
> > > +	IOMMU_VIOMMU_TYPE_TEGRA241_CMDQV = 2,
> > > +};
> > 
> > This is a little confusing.. I understand that we need a new viommu type
> > to copy the new struct iommu_viommu_tegra241_cmdqv b/w the user & kernel
> > 
> > But, in a previous patch (Add vsmmu_alloc impl op), we add a check to
> > fallback to the standard type SMMUv3, if the impl_ops->vsmmu_alloc 
> > returns -EOPNOTSUPP:
> > 
> > 	if (master->smmu->impl_ops && master->smmu->impl_ops->vsmmu_alloc)
> > 		vsmmu = master->smmu->impl_ops->vsmmu_alloc(
> > 			master->smmu, s2_parent, ictx, viommu_type, user_data);
> > 	if (PTR_ERR(vsmmu) == -EOPNOTSUPP) {
> > 		if (viommu_type != IOMMU_VIOMMU_TYPE_ARM_SMMUV3)
> > 			return ERR_PTR(-EOPNOTSUPP);
> > 		/* Fallback to standard SMMUv3 type if viommu_type matches */
> > 		vsmmu = iommufd_viommu_alloc(ictx, struct arm_vsmmu, core,
> > 					     &arm_vsmmu_ops);
> > 
> > Now, if we'll ALWAYS try to allocate an impl-specified vsmmu first, even
> > when the viommu_type == IOMMU_VIOMMU_TYPE_ARM_SMMUV3, we are anyways
> > going to return back from the impl_ops->vsmmu_alloc with -EOPNOTSUPP.
> 
> That's not necessarily true. An impl_ops->vsmmu_alloc can support
> IOMMU_VIOMMU_TYPE_ARM_SMMUV3 potentially, e.g. an impl could just
> toggle a few special bits in a register and return a valid vsmmu
> pointer.
> 
> It doesn't work like this with VCMDQ as it supports its own type,
> but for the long run I think we should pass in the standard type
> to impl_ops->vsmmu_alloc too.
> 
> > Then we'll again check if the retval was -EOPNOTSUPP and re-check the
> > viommu_type requested.. which seems a little counter intuitive.
> 
> It's just prioritizing the impl_ops->vsmmu_alloc. Similar to the
> probe, if VCMDQ is missing or encountering some initialization
> problem, give it a chance to fallback to the standard SMMU.

I changed to this and it should be clear now:

+       /* Prioritize the impl that may support IOMMU_VIOMMU_TYPE_ARM_SMMUV3 */
+       if (master->smmu->impl_ops && master->smmu->impl_ops->vsmmu_alloc)
+               vsmmu = master->smmu->impl_ops->vsmmu_alloc(
+                       master->smmu, s2_parent, ictx, viommu_type, user_data);
+       if (PTR_ERR(vsmmu) == -EOPNOTSUPP) {
+               /* Otherwise, allocate an IOMMU_VIOMMU_TYPE_ARM_SMMUV3 here */
+               if (viommu_type == IOMMU_VIOMMU_TYPE_ARM_SMMUV3)
+                       vsmmu = iommufd_viommu_alloc(ictx, struct arm_vsmmu,
+                                                    core, &arm_vsmmu_ops);

Thanks
Nicolin