Re: [PATCH v2 4/7] iommu: Let iommu.strict override ops->def_domain_type

[Baolu Lu <baolu.lu@linux.intel.com>]

On 2022/12/7 7:09, Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
>   static ssize_t iommu_group_store_type(struct iommu_group *group,
>   				      const char *buf, size_t count)
>   {
> -	struct group_device *grp_dev;
> -	struct device *dev;
> -	int ret, req_type;
> +	enum dma_api_policy policy;
> +	int ret;
>   
>   	if (!capable(CAP_SYS_ADMIN) || !capable(CAP_SYS_RAWIO))
>   		return -EACCES;
> @@ -2977,77 +2907,30 @@ static ssize_t iommu_group_store_type(struct iommu_group *group,
>   		return -EINVAL;
>   
>   	if (sysfs_streq(buf, "identity"))
> -		req_type = IOMMU_DOMAIN_IDENTITY;
> +		policy = DMA_API_POLICY_IDENTITY;
>   	else if (sysfs_streq(buf, "DMA"))
> -		req_type = IOMMU_DOMAIN_DMA;
> +		policy = DMA_API_POLICY_STRICT;
>   	else if (sysfs_streq(buf, "DMA-FQ"))
> -		req_type = IOMMU_DOMAIN_DMA_FQ;
> +		policy = DMA_API_POLICY_LAZY;
>   	else if (sysfs_streq(buf, "auto"))
> -		req_type = 0;
> +		policy = DMA_API_POLICY_ANY;
>   	else
>   		return -EINVAL;
>   
>   	/*
> -	 * Lock/Unlock the group mutex here before device lock to
> -	 * 1. Make sure that the iommu group has only one device (this is a
> -	 *    prerequisite for step 2)
> -	 * 2. Get struct *dev which is needed to lock device
> -	 */
> -	mutex_lock(&group->mutex);
> -	if (iommu_group_device_count(group) != 1) {
> -		mutex_unlock(&group->mutex);
> -		pr_err_ratelimited("Cannot change default domain: Group has more than one device\n");
> -		return -EINVAL;
> -	}
> -
> -	/* Since group has only one device */
> -	grp_dev = list_first_entry(&group->devices, struct group_device, list);
> -	dev = grp_dev->dev;
> -	get_device(dev);
> -
> -	/*
> -	 * Don't hold the group mutex because taking group mutex first and then
> -	 * the device lock could potentially cause a deadlock as below. Assume
> -	 * two threads T1 and T2. T1 is trying to change default domain of an
> -	 * iommu group and T2 is trying to hot unplug a device or release [1] VF
> -	 * of a PCIe device which is in the same iommu group. T1 takes group
> -	 * mutex and before it could take device lock assume T2 has taken device
> -	 * lock and is yet to take group mutex. Now, both the threads will be
> -	 * waiting for the other thread to release lock. Below, lock order was
> -	 * suggested.
> -	 * device_lock(dev);
> -	 *	mutex_lock(&group->mutex);
> -	 *		iommu_change_dev_def_domain();
> -	 *	mutex_unlock(&group->mutex);
> -	 * device_unlock(dev);
> -	 *
> -	 * [1] Typical device release path
> -	 * device_lock() from device/driver core code
> -	 *  -> bus_notifier()
> -	 *   -> iommu_bus_notifier()
> -	 *    -> iommu_release_device()
> -	 *     -> ops->release_device() vendor driver calls back iommu core code
> -	 *      -> mutex_lock() from iommu core code
> +	 * Taking ownership disables the DMA API domain, prevents drivers from
> +	 * being attached, and switches to a blocking domain. Releasing
> +	 * ownership will put back the new or original DMA API domain.
>   	 */
> -	mutex_unlock(&group->mutex);
> -
> -	/* Check if the device in the group still has a driver bound to it */
> -	device_lock(dev);

With device_lock() removed, this probably races with the
iommu_release_device() path? group->mutex seems insufficient to avoid
the race. Perhaps I missed anything.

> -	if (device_is_bound(dev) && !(req_type == IOMMU_DOMAIN_DMA_FQ &&
> -	    group->default_domain->type == IOMMU_DOMAIN_DMA)) {
> -		pr_err_ratelimited("Device is still bound to driver\n");
> -		ret = -EBUSY;
> -		goto out;
> -	}
> -
> -	ret = iommu_change_dev_def_domain(group, dev, req_type);
> -	ret = ret ?: count;
> -
> -out:
> -	device_unlock(dev);
> -	put_device(dev);
> +	ret = iommu_group_claim_dma_owner(group, &ret);
> +	if (ret)
> +		return ret;
>   
> -	return ret;
> +	ret = iommu_change_group_dma_api_policy(group, policy);
> +	iommu_group_release_dma_owner(group);
> +	if (ret)
> +		return ret;
> +	return count;
>   }
>   
>   static bool iommu_is_default_domain(struct iommu_group *group)

Best regards,
baolu