linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH rdma-next 1/2] RDMA/uverbs: Add DMABUF object type and operations

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <c03a82ca-5dc8-407d-a1d4-ac97bb646b2e@nvidia.com>
Date: Wed, 21 Jan 2026 18:27:27 +0200
From: Yishai Hadas <yishaih@...dia.com>
To: Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@...pe.ca>, Leon Romanovsky <leon@...nel.org>
CC: Edward Srouji <edwards@...dia.com>, Sumit Semwal
	<sumit.semwal@...aro.org>, Christian König
	<christian.koenig@....com>, <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	<linux-rdma@...r.kernel.org>, <linux-media@...r.kernel.org>,
	<dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org>, <linaro-mm-sig@...ts.linaro.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH rdma-next 1/2] RDMA/uverbs: Add DMABUF object type and
 operations

On 21/01/2026 15:56, Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 21, 2026 at 10:32:46AM +0200, Leon Romanovsky wrote:
>>>> +static int uverbs_dmabuf_attach(struct dma_buf *dmabuf,
>>>> +				struct dma_buf_attachment *attachment)
>>>> +{
>>>> +	struct ib_uverbs_dmabuf_file *priv = dmabuf->priv;
>>>> +
>>>> +	if (!attachment->peer2peer)
>>>> +		return -EOPNOTSUPP;
>>>> +
>>>> +	if (priv->revoked)
>>>> +		return -ENODEV;
>>>
>>> This should only be checked in map
>>
>> I disagree with word "only", the more accurate word is "too". There is
>> no need to allow new importer attach if this exporter is marked as
>> revoked.
> 
> It must check during map, during attach as well is redundant and a bit
> confusing.
> 

OK, let's drop this check as part of the 'attach'.

>>> This should also eventually call the new revoke testing function Leon
>>> is adding
>>
>> We will add it once my series will be accepted.
> 
> It should also refuse pinned importers with an always fail pin op
> until we get that done. This is a case like VFIO where the lifecycle
> is more general and I don't want to accidently allow things that
> shouldn't work.
> 

Sure, will be part of V1.

Thanks,
Yishai