Re: [PATCH 01/11] iommu: Add device dma ownership set/release interfaces

From: Lu Baolu <baolu.lu@linux.intel.com>
To: Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@nvidia.com>
Cc: Kevin Tian <kevin.tian@intel.com>,
	Chaitanya Kulkarni <kch@nvidia.com>,
	Ashok Raj <ashok.raj@intel.com>,
	kvm@vger.kernel.org, rafael@kernel.org,
	Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>,
	Cornelia Huck <cohuck@redhat.com>, Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, iommu@lists.linux-foundation.org,
	Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>,
	Alex Williamson <alex.williamson@redhat.com>,
	Jacob jun Pan <jacob.jun.pan@intel.com>,
	linux-pci@vger.kernel.org, Bjorn Helgaas <bhelgaas@google.com>,
	Diana Craciun <diana.craciun@oss.nxp.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 01/11] iommu: Add device dma ownership set/release interfaces
Date: Wed, 17 Nov 2021 13:22:19 +0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <d79acc01-eeaf-e6ac-0415-af498c355a00@linux.intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20211116134603.GA2105516@nvidia.com>

Hi Jason,

On 11/16/21 9:46 PM, Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 16, 2021 at 09:57:30AM +0800, Lu Baolu wrote:
>> Hi Christoph,
>>
>> On 11/15/21 9:14 PM, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
>>> On Mon, Nov 15, 2021 at 10:05:42AM +0800, Lu Baolu wrote:
>>>> +enum iommu_dma_owner {
>>>> +	DMA_OWNER_NONE,
>>>> +	DMA_OWNER_KERNEL,
>>>> +	DMA_OWNER_USER,
>>>> +};
>>>> +
>>>
>>>> +	enum iommu_dma_owner dma_owner;
>>>> +	refcount_t owner_cnt;
>>>> +	struct file *owner_user_file;
>>>
>>> I'd just overload the ownership into owner_user_file,
>>>
>>>    NULL			-> no owner
>>>    (struct file *)1UL)	-> kernel
>>>    real pointer		-> user
>>>
>>> Which could simplify a lot of the code dealing with the owner.
>>>
>>
>> Yeah! Sounds reasonable. I will make this in the next version.
> 
> It would be good to figure out how to make iommu_attach_device()
> enforce no other driver binding as a kernel user without a file *, as
> Robin pointed to, before optimizing this.
> 
> This fixes an existing bug where iommu_attach_device() only checks the
> group size and is vunerable to a hot plug increasing the group size
> after it returns. That check should be replaced by this series's logic
> instead.

As my my understanding, the essence of this problem is that only the
user owner of the iommu_group could attach an UNMANAGED domain to it.
If I understand it right, how about introducing a new interface to
allocate a user managed domain and storing the user file pointer in it.

--- a/include/linux/iommu.h
+++ b/include/linux/iommu.h
@@ -94,6 +94,7 @@ struct iommu_domain {
         void *handler_token;
         struct iommu_domain_geometry geometry;
         struct iommu_dma_cookie *iova_cookie;
+       struct file *owner_user_file;
  };
--- a/drivers/iommu/iommu.c
+++ b/drivers/iommu/iommu.c
@@ -1902,6 +1902,18 @@ struct iommu_domain *iommu_domain_alloc(struct 
bus_type *bus)
  }
  EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(iommu_domain_alloc);

+struct iommu_domain *iommu_domain_alloc_user(struct bus_type *bus,
+                                            struct file *filep)
+{
+       struct iommu_domain *domain;
+
+       domain = __iommu_domain_alloc(bus, IOMMU_DOMAIN_UNMANAGED);
+       if (domain)
+               domain->owner_user_file = filep;
+
+       return domain;
+}

When attaching a domain to an user-owned iommu_group, both group and
domain should have matched user fd.

Does above help here?

Best regards,
baolu
_______________________________________________
iommu mailing list
iommu@lists.linux-foundation.org
https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/iommu
