linux-kernel - Re: [RFC PATCH] iommufd: Destroy vdevice on device unbind

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: <aE+yopQb5T8VWk0i@yilunxu-OptiPlex-7050>
Date: Mon, 16 Jun 2025 13:58:58 +0800
From: Xu Yilun <yilun.xu@...ux.intel.com>
To: "Aneesh Kumar K.V" <aneesh.kumar@...nel.org>
Cc: "Tian, Kevin" <kevin.tian@...el.com>,
	"iommu@...ts.linux.dev" <iommu@...ts.linux.dev>,
	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@...pe.ca>, Joerg Roedel <joro@...tes.org>,
	Will Deacon <will@...nel.org>, Robin Murphy <robin.murphy@....com>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH] iommufd: Destroy vdevice on device unbind

> While vdevice objects can still be explicitly destroyed using
> iommufd_destroy(), with this patch, if the idevice is still bound,
> attempting to destroy the vdevice will return EBUSY.

I didn't get the necessity of this restriction. A vdev could not
outlive idev, but it could be ended earlier than idev, isn't it?

> 
> In effect, the change ensures that once a vdevice is created, its
> lifecycle is tied to that of the idevice.