On Thu, 5 Sep 2019 15:59:28 +0800
Liu Yi L <yi.l....@intel.com> wrote:
> This patch adds vfio_add_group_dev() calling in probe() to make
> vfio-mdev-pci work well with non-singleton iommu group. User could
> bind devices from a non-singleton iommu group to either vfio-pci
> driver or this sample driver. Existing passthru policy works well
> for this non-singleton group.
>
> This is actually a policy choice. A device driver can make this call
> if it wants to be vfio viable. And it needs to provide dummy
> vfio_device_ops which is required by vfio framework. To prevent user
> from opening the device from the iommu backed group fd, the open
> callback of the dummy vfio_device_ops should return -ENODEV to fail
> the VFIO_GET_DEVICE_FD request from userspace.
>
> Cc: Kevin Tian <kevin.t...@intel.com>
> Cc: Lu Baolu <baolu...@linux.intel.com>
> Signed-off-by: Liu Yi L <yi.l....@intel.com>
> ---
> drivers/vfio/pci/vfio_mdev_pci.c | 91
> ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++----
> 1 file changed, 82 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/vfio/pci/vfio_mdev_pci.c
> b/drivers/vfio/pci/vfio_mdev_pci.c
> index 09143d3..a61c20d 100644
> --- a/drivers/vfio/pci/vfio_mdev_pci.c
> +++ b/drivers/vfio/pci/vfio_mdev_pci.c
> @@ -107,19 +107,27 @@ struct vfio_mdev_pci {
> static int vfio_mdev_pci_create(struct kobject *kobj, struct mdev_device
> *mdev)
> {
> struct device *pdev;
> + struct vfio_device *device;
> struct vfio_mdev_pci_device *vmdev;
> struct vfio_mdev_pci *pmdev;
> int ret;
>
> pdev = mdev_parent_dev(mdev);
> - vmdev = dev_get_drvdata(pdev);
> + device = vfio_device_get_from_dev(pdev);
> + vmdev = vfio_device_data(device);
>
> - if (atomic_dec_if_positive(&vmdev->avail) < 0)
> - return -ENOSPC;
> + if (atomic_dec_if_positive(&vmdev->avail) < 0) {
> + ret = -ENOSPC;
> + goto out;
> + }
>
> + pr_info("%s, available instance: %d\n",
> + __func__, atomic_read(&vmdev->avail));
> pmdev = kzalloc(sizeof(struct vfio_mdev_pci), GFP_KERNEL);
> - if (!pmdev)
> - return -ENOMEM;
> + if (!pmdev) {
> + ret = -ENOMEM;
> + goto out;
> + }
>
> pmdev->mdev = mdev;
> pmdev->vdev = &vmdev->vdev;
> @@ -130,10 +138,11 @@ static int vfio_mdev_pci_create(struct kobject *kobj,
> struct mdev_device *mdev)
> __func__, dev_name(mdev_dev(mdev)), dev_name(pdev));
> kfree(pmdev);
> atomic_inc(&vmdev->avail);
> - return ret;
> }
>
> - return 0;
> +out:
> + vfio_device_put(device);
> + return ret;
> }
>
> static int vfio_mdev_pci_remove(struct mdev_device *mdev)
> @@ -145,6 +154,8 @@ static int vfio_mdev_pci_remove(struct mdev_device *mdev)
>
> kfree(pmdev);
> atomic_inc(&vmdev->avail);
> + pr_info("%s, available instance: %d\n",
> + __func__, atomic_read(&vmdev->avail));
> pr_info("%s, succeeded for mdev: %s\n", __func__,
> dev_name(mdev_dev(mdev)));
>
> @@ -236,12 +247,65 @@ static ssize_t vfio_mdev_pci_write(struct mdev_device
> *mdev,
> return vfio_pci_write(pmdev->vdev, (char __user *)buf, count, ppos);
> }
>
> +static int vfio_pci_dummy_open(void *device_data)
> +{
> + struct vfio_mdev_pci_device *vmdev =
> + (struct vfio_mdev_pci_device *) device_data;
> + pr_warn("Device %s is not viable for vfio-pci passthru, please follow"
> + " vfio-mdev passthru path as it has been wrapped as mdev!!!\n",
> + dev_name(&vmdev->vdev.pdev->dev));
> + return -ENODEV;
> +}
> +
> +static void vfio_pci_dummy_release(void *device_data)
> +{
> +}
Theoretically .release will never be called. If we're paranoid, we
could keep it with a pr_warn.
> +
> +long vfio_pci_dummy_ioctl(void *device_data,
> + unsigned int cmd, unsigned long arg)
> +{
> + return 0;
> +}
> +
> +ssize_t vfio_pci_dummy_read(void *device_data, char __user *buf,
> + size_t count, loff_t *ppos)
> +{
> + return 0;
> +}
> +
> +ssize_t vfio_pci_dummy_write(void *device_data, const char __user *buf,
> + size_t count, loff_t *ppos)
> +{
> + return 0;
> +}
> +
> +int vfio_pci_dummy_mmap(void *device_data, struct vm_area_struct *vma)
> +{
> + return 0;
> +}
> +
> +void vfio_pci_dummy_request(void *device_data, unsigned int count)
> +{
> +}
AFAICT, none of .ioctl, .read, .write, .mmap, or .request need to be
provided, only .open and only .release for paranoia.
> +
> +static const struct vfio_device_ops vfio_pci_dummy_ops = {
> + .name = "vfio-pci",
This is impersonating vfio-pci, shouldn't we use something like
"vfio-mdev-pci-dummy". Thanks,
Alex
> + .open = vfio_pci_dummy_open,
> + .release = vfio_pci_dummy_release,
> + .ioctl = vfio_pci_dummy_ioctl,
> + .read = vfio_pci_dummy_read,
> + .write = vfio_pci_dummy_write,
> + .mmap = vfio_pci_dummy_mmap,
> + .request = vfio_pci_dummy_request,
> +};
> +
> static int vfio_mdev_pci_driver_probe(struct pci_dev *pdev,
> const struct pci_device_id *id)
> {
> struct vfio_mdev_pci_device *vmdev;
> struct vfio_pci_device *vdev;
> const struct mdev_parent_ops *ops;
> + struct iommu_group *group;
> int ret;
>
> if (pdev->hdr_type != PCI_HEADER_TYPE_NORMAL)
> @@ -260,6 +324,10 @@ static int vfio_mdev_pci_driver_probe(struct pci_dev
> *pdev,
> return -EBUSY;
> }
>
> + group = vfio_iommu_group_get(&pdev->dev);
> + if (!group)
> + return -EINVAL;
> +
> vmdev = kzalloc(sizeof(*vmdev), GFP_KERNEL);
> if (!vmdev)
> return -ENOMEM;
> @@ -304,7 +372,12 @@ static int vfio_mdev_pci_driver_probe(struct pci_dev
> *pdev,
> #endif
> vdev->disable_idle_d3 = disable_idle_d3;
>
> - pci_set_drvdata(pdev, vmdev);
> + ret = vfio_add_group_dev(&pdev->dev, &vfio_pci_dummy_ops, vmdev);
> + if (ret) {
> + vfio_iommu_group_put(group, &pdev->dev);
> + kfree(vmdev);
> + return ret;
> + }
>
> ret = vfio_pci_reflck_attach(vdev);
> if (ret) {
> @@ -352,7 +425,7 @@ static void vfio_mdev_pci_driver_remove(struct pci_dev
> *pdev)
>
> mdev_unregister_device(&pdev->dev);
>
> - vmdev = pci_get_drvdata(pdev);
> + vmdev = vfio_del_group_dev(&pdev->dev);
> if (!vmdev)
> return;
>
