On Sat, 13 May 2023 06:28:14 -0700
Yi Liu <yi.l....@intel.com> wrote:
> into vfio_device_group_open(). This is more consistent with what will
> be done in vfio device cdev path.
Same comment regarding flowing commit subject into body on this series.
>
> Reviewed-by: Kevin Tian <kevin.t...@intel.com>
> Tested-by: Terrence Xu <terrence...@intel.com>
> Tested-by: Nicolin Chen <nicol...@nvidia.com>
> Tested-by: Yanting Jiang <yanting.ji...@intel.com>
> Tested-by: Shameer Kolothum <shameerali.kolothum.th...@huawei.com>
> Signed-off-by: Yi Liu <yi.l....@intel.com>
> ---
> drivers/vfio/group.c | 6 ++++++
> drivers/vfio/iommufd.c | 32 +++++++++++++++++++-------------
> drivers/vfio/vfio.h | 9 +++++++++
> 3 files changed, 34 insertions(+), 13 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/vfio/group.c b/drivers/vfio/group.c
> index a17584e8be15..cfd0b9254bbc 100644
> --- a/drivers/vfio/group.c
> +++ b/drivers/vfio/group.c
> @@ -192,6 +192,12 @@ static int vfio_device_group_open(struct
> vfio_device_file *df)
> vfio_device_group_get_kvm_safe(device);
>
> df->iommufd = device->group->iommufd;
> + if (df->iommufd && vfio_device_is_noiommu(device) && device->open_count
> == 0) {
> + ret = vfio_iommufd_compat_probe_noiommu(device,
> + df->iommufd);
> + if (ret)
> + goto out_put_kvm;
> + }
>
> ret = vfio_device_open(df);
> if (ret) {
> diff --git a/drivers/vfio/iommufd.c b/drivers/vfio/iommufd.c
> index a18e920be164..7a654a1437f0 100644
> --- a/drivers/vfio/iommufd.c
> +++ b/drivers/vfio/iommufd.c
> @@ -46,6 +46,24 @@ static void vfio_iommufd_noiommu_unbind(struct vfio_device
> *vdev)
> }
> }
>
> +int vfio_iommufd_compat_probe_noiommu(struct vfio_device *device,
> + struct iommufd_ctx *ictx)
> +{
> + u32 ioas_id;
> +
> + if (!capable(CAP_SYS_RAWIO))
> + return -EPERM;
> +
> + /*
> + * Require no compat ioas to be assigned to proceed. The basic
> + * statement is that the user cannot have done something that
> + * implies they expected translation to exist
> + */
> + if (!iommufd_vfio_compat_ioas_get_id(ictx, &ioas_id))
> + return -EPERM;
> + return 0;
> +}
I think the purpose of this function is to keep the iommufd namespace
out of the group, but we're muddying it as a general grab bag of
noiommu validation. What if the caller retained the RAWIO test and
comment, and this function simply became a wrapper around the iommufd
function, ex:
bool vfio_iommufd_device_has_compat_ioas(struct vfio_device *device,
struct iommufd_ctx *ictx)
{
u32 ioas_id;
return !iommufd_vfio_compat_ioas_get_id(ictx, &ioas_id));
}
Thanks,
Alex
> +
> int vfio_iommufd_bind(struct vfio_device *vdev, struct iommufd_ctx *ictx)
> {
> u32 ioas_id;
> @@ -54,20 +72,8 @@ int vfio_iommufd_bind(struct vfio_device *vdev, struct
> iommufd_ctx *ictx)
>
> lockdep_assert_held(&vdev->dev_set->lock);
>
> - if (vfio_device_is_noiommu(vdev)) {
> - if (!capable(CAP_SYS_RAWIO))
> - return -EPERM;
> -
> - /*
> - * Require no compat ioas to be assigned to proceed. The basic
> - * statement is that the user cannot have done something that
> - * implies they expected translation to exist
> - */
> - if (!iommufd_vfio_compat_ioas_get_id(ictx, &ioas_id))
> - return -EPERM;
> -
> + if (vfio_device_is_noiommu(vdev))
> return vfio_iommufd_noiommu_bind(vdev, ictx, &device_id);
> - }
>
> ret = vdev->ops->bind_iommufd(vdev, ictx, &device_id);
> if (ret)
> diff --git a/drivers/vfio/vfio.h b/drivers/vfio/vfio.h
> index 785afc40ece8..8884b557fb26 100644
> --- a/drivers/vfio/vfio.h
> +++ b/drivers/vfio/vfio.h
> @@ -234,9 +234,18 @@ static inline void vfio_container_cleanup(void)
> #endif
>
> #if IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_IOMMUFD)
> +int vfio_iommufd_compat_probe_noiommu(struct vfio_device *device,
> + struct iommufd_ctx *ictx);
> int vfio_iommufd_bind(struct vfio_device *device, struct iommufd_ctx *ictx);
> void vfio_iommufd_unbind(struct vfio_device *device);
> #else
> +static inline int
> +vfio_iommufd_compat_probe_noiommu(struct vfio_device *device,
> + struct iommufd_ctx *ictx)
> +{
> + return -EOPNOTSUPP;
> +}
> +
> static inline int vfio_iommufd_bind(struct vfio_device *device,
> struct iommufd_ctx *ictx)
> {
