linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v3 27/28] drm/intel/pciids: Add match with VFIO override

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: <r5c2d7zcz2xemyo4mlwpzwhiix7vysznp335dqzhx3zumafrs4@62tmcvj4ccao>
Date: Wed, 5 Nov 2025 16:20:33 +0100
From: Michał Winiarski <michal.winiarski@...el.com>
To: Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@...pe.ca>
CC: Lucas De Marchi <lucas.demarchi@...el.com>, Alex Williamson
	<alex@...zbot.org>, Thomas Hellström
	<thomas.hellstrom@...ux.intel.com>, Rodrigo Vivi <rodrigo.vivi@...el.com>,
	Yishai Hadas <yishaih@...dia.com>, Kevin Tian <kevin.tian@...el.com>,
	"Shameer Kolothum" <skolothumtho@...dia.com>,
	<intel-xe@...ts.freedesktop.org>, <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	<kvm@...r.kernel.org>, Matthew Brost <matthew.brost@...el.com>, Michal
 Wajdeczko <michal.wajdeczko@...el.com>, <dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org>,
	Jani Nikula <jani.nikula@...ux.intel.com>, Joonas Lahtinen
	<joonas.lahtinen@...ux.intel.com>, Tvrtko Ursulin <tursulin@...ulin.net>,
	David Airlie <airlied@...il.com>, Simona Vetter <simona@...ll.ch>, Lukasz
 Laguna <lukasz.laguna@...el.com>, Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 27/28] drm/intel/pciids: Add match with VFIO override

On Tue, Nov 04, 2025 at 03:27:14PM -0400, Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 04, 2025 at 11:41:53AM -0600, Lucas De Marchi wrote:
> 
> > > > > +#define INTEL_VGA_VFIO_DEVICE(_id, _info) { \
> > > > > +	PCI_DEVICE(PCI_VENDOR_ID_INTEL, (_id)), \
> > > > > +	.class = PCI_BASE_CLASS_DISPLAY << 16, .class_mask = 0xff << 16, \
> > > > > +	.driver_data = (kernel_ulong_t)(_info), \
> > > > > +	.override_only = PCI_ID_F_VFIO_DRIVER_OVERRIDE, \
> > > > 
> > > > why do we need this and can't use PCI_DRIVER_OVERRIDE_DEVICE_VFIO()
> > > > directly? Note that there are GPUs that wouldn't match the display class
> > > > above.
> > > > 
> > > > 	edb660ad79ff ("drm/intel/pciids: Add match on vendor/id only")
> > > > 	5e0de2dfbc1b ("drm/xe/cri: Add CRI platform definition")
> > > > 
> > > > Lucas De Marchi
> > > > 
> > > 
> > > I'll define it on xe-vfio-pci side and use
> > 
> > but no matter where it's defined, why do you need it to match on the
> > class? The vid/devid should be sufficient.
> 
> +1
> 
> Jason

I don't need to match on class.

With PCI_DRIVER_OVERRIDE_DEVICE_VFIO it just becomes:
#define INTEL_PCI_VFIO_DEVICE(_id) { \
	PCI_DRIVER_OVERRIDE_DEVICE_VFIO(PCI_VENDOR_ID_INTEL, (_id)) \
}

static const struct pci_device_id xe_vfio_pci_table[] = {
	INTEL_PTL_IDS(INTEL_PCI_VFIO_DEVICE),
	INTEL_WCL_IDS(INTEL_PCI_VFIO_DEVICE),
	INTEL_BMG_IDS(INTEL_PCI_VFIO_DEVICE),
	{}
};

So, no matching on class, but I still do need a helper macro.

Thanks,
-Michał