From: Aneesh Kumar K.V <aneesh.kumar@kernel.org>
To: Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@nvidia.com>, Xu Yilun <yilun.xu@linux.intel.com>
Cc: kvm@vger.kernel.org, sumit.semwal@linaro.org,
christian.koenig@amd.com, pbonzini@redhat.com, seanjc@google.com,
alex.williamson@redhat.com, dan.j.williams@intel.com,
aik@amd.com, linux-coco@lists.linux.dev,
dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org, linux-media@vger.kernel.org,
linaro-mm-sig@lists.linaro.org, vivek.kasireddy@intel.com,
yilun.xu@intel.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
lukas@wunner.de, yan.y.zhao@intel.com, daniel.vetter@ffwll.ch,
leon@kernel.org, baolu.lu@linux.intel.com,
zhenzhong.duan@intel.com, tao1.su@intel.com,
linux-pci@vger.kernel.org, zhiw@nvidia.com,
simona.vetter@ffwll.ch, shameerali.kolothum.thodi@huawei.com,
iommu@lists.linux.dev, kevin.tian@intel.com
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 17/30] iommufd/device: Add TSM Bind/Unbind for TIO support
Date: Wed, 04 Jun 2025 14:10:43 +0530 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <yq5aplfj99x0.fsf@kernel.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20250603122149.GH376789@nvidia.com>
Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@nvidia.com> writes:
> On Tue, Jun 03, 2025 at 02:20:51PM +0800, Xu Yilun wrote:
>> > Wouldn’t it be simpler to skip the reference count increment altogether
>> > and just call tsm_unbind in the virtual device’s destroy callback?
>> > (iommufd_vdevice_destroy())
>>
>> The vdevice refcount is the main concern, there is also an IOMMU_DESTROY
>> ioctl. User could just free the vdevice instance if no refcount, while VFIO
>> is still in bound state. That seems not the correct free order.
>
> Freeing the vdevice should automatically unbind it..
>
One challenge I ran into during implementation was the dependency of
vfio on iommufd_device. When vfio needs to perform a tsm_unbind,
it only has access to an iommufd_device.
However, TSM operations like binding and unbinding are handled at the
iommufd_vdevice level. The issue? There’s no direct link from
iommufd_device back to iommufd_vdevice.
To address this, I modified the following structures:
modified drivers/iommu/iommufd/iommufd_private.h
@@ -428,6 +428,7 @@ struct iommufd_device {
/* protect iopf_enabled counter */
struct mutex iopf_lock;
unsigned int iopf_enabled;
+ struct iommufd_vdevice *vdev;
};
static inline struct iommufd_device *
@@ -613,6 +614,7 @@ struct iommufd_vdevice {
struct iommufd_object obj;
struct iommufd_ctx *ictx;
struct iommufd_viommu *viommu;
+ struct iommufd_device *idev;
struct device *dev;
struct mutex mutex; /* mutex to synchronize updates to tsm_bound */
u64 id; /* per-vIOMMU virtual ID */
These fields are updated during tsm_bind and tsm_unbind, so they must be
protected by the appropriate locks:
Updating vdevice->idev requires holding vdev->mutex (vdev_lock).
Updating device->vdev requires idev->igroup->lock (idev_lock).
tsm_unbind in vdevice_destroy:
vdevice_destroy() ends up calling tsm_unbind() while holding only the
vdev_lock. At first glance, this seems unsafe. But in practice, it's
fine because the corresponding iommufd_device has already been destroyed
when the VFIO device file descriptor was closed—triggering
vfio_df_iommufd_unbind().
I’ve added an in-code comment to explain why tsm_unbind() is safe here
without acquiring the idev_lock. Hope that is ok.
-aneesh
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2025-06-04 9:00 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 68+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2025-05-29 5:34 [RFC PATCH 00/30] Host side (KVM/VFIO/IOMMUFD) support for TDISP using TSM Xu Yilun
2025-05-29 5:34 ` [RFC PATCH 01/30] HACK: dma-buf: Introduce dma_buf_get_pfn_unlocked() kAPI Xu Yilun
2025-05-29 5:34 ` [RFC PATCH 02/30] vfio: Export vfio device get and put registration helpers Xu Yilun
2025-05-29 5:34 ` [RFC PATCH 03/30] vfio/pci: Share the core device pointer while invoking feature functions Xu Yilun
2025-05-29 5:34 ` [RFC PATCH 04/30] vfio/pci: Allow MMIO regions to be exported through dma-buf Xu Yilun
2025-05-29 5:34 ` [RFC PATCH 05/30] fixup! vfio/pci: fix dma-buf revoke typo on reset Xu Yilun
2025-05-29 5:34 ` [RFC PATCH 06/30] HACK: vfio/pci: Support get_pfn() callback for dma-buf Xu Yilun
2025-05-29 5:34 ` [RFC PATCH 07/30] KVM: Support vfio_dmabuf backed MMIO region Xu Yilun
2025-05-29 5:34 ` [RFC PATCH 08/30] KVM: x86/mmu: Handle page fault for vfio_dmabuf backed MMIO Xu Yilun
2025-05-29 5:34 ` [RFC PATCH 09/30] KVM: x86/mmu: Handle page fault for private MMIO Xu Yilun
2025-05-29 5:34 ` [RFC PATCH 10/30] vfio/pci: Export vfio dma-buf specific info for importers Xu Yilun
2025-06-02 13:30 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2025-06-03 5:01 ` Xu Yilun
2025-05-29 5:34 ` [RFC PATCH 11/30] KVM: vfio_dmabuf: Fetch VFIO specific dma-buf data for sanity check Xu Yilun
2025-05-29 5:34 ` [RFC PATCH 12/30] iommufd/device: Associate a kvm pointer to iommufd_device Xu Yilun
2025-05-29 5:34 ` [RFC PATCH 13/30] fixup! iommufd/selftest: Sync iommufd_device_bind() change to selftest Xu Yilun
2025-05-29 5:34 ` [RFC PATCH 14/30] iommu/arm-smmu-v3-iommufd: Pass in kvm pointer to viommu_alloc Xu Yilun
2025-05-29 5:34 ` [RFC PATCH 15/30] fixup: iommu/selftest: Sync .viommu_alloc() change to selftest Xu Yilun
2025-05-29 5:34 ` [RFC PATCH 16/30] iommufd/viommu: track the kvm pointer & its refcount in viommu core Xu Yilun
2025-05-29 5:35 ` [RFC PATCH 17/30] iommufd/device: Add TSM Bind/Unbind for TIO support Xu Yilun
2025-06-02 12:43 ` Aneesh Kumar K.V
2025-06-03 6:20 ` Xu Yilun
2025-06-03 12:21 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2025-06-04 8:40 ` Aneesh Kumar K.V [this message]
2025-06-04 13:24 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2025-06-06 7:59 ` Aneesh Kumar K.V
2025-05-29 5:35 ` [RFC PATCH 18/30] iommufd/viommu: Add trusted IOMMU configuration handlers for vdev Xu Yilun
2025-05-29 5:35 ` [RFC PATCH 19/30] vfio/pci: Add TSM TDI bind/unbind IOCTLs for TEE-IO support Xu Yilun
2025-06-01 10:45 ` Aneesh Kumar K.V
2025-06-02 14:43 ` Xu Yilun
2025-06-04 13:37 ` Aneesh Kumar K.V
2025-06-05 9:41 ` Xu Yilun
2025-06-05 15:09 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2025-06-06 3:25 ` Xu Yilun
2025-06-05 16:09 ` Aneesh Kumar K.V
2025-06-16 8:16 ` Aneesh Kumar K.V
2025-06-18 4:54 ` Xu Yilun
2025-06-05 12:03 ` Aneesh Kumar K.V
2025-06-05 15:10 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2025-06-05 16:17 ` Aneesh Kumar K.V
2025-06-05 16:33 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2025-06-06 4:26 ` Xu Yilun
2025-06-06 9:32 ` Aneesh Kumar K.V
2025-06-06 12:09 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2025-05-29 5:35 ` [RFC PATCH 20/30] vfio/pci: Do TSM Unbind before zapping bars Xu Yilun
2025-06-02 5:20 ` Aneesh Kumar K.V
2025-06-02 13:56 ` Xu Yilun
2025-06-02 14:00 ` Aneesh Kumar K.V
2025-06-03 4:50 ` Xu Yilun
2025-05-29 5:35 ` [RFC PATCH 21/30] iommufd/vdevice: Add TSM Guest request uAPI Xu Yilun
2025-05-29 5:35 ` [RFC PATCH 22/30] fixup! PCI/TSM: Change the guest request type definition Xu Yilun
2025-05-29 5:35 ` [RFC PATCH 23/30] coco/tdx_tsm: Introduce a "tdx" subsystem and "tsm" device Xu Yilun
2025-05-29 5:35 ` [RFC PATCH 24/30] coco/tdx_tsm: TEE Security Manager driver for TDX Xu Yilun
2025-05-29 5:35 ` [RFC PATCH 25/30] coco/tdx_tsm: Add connect()/disconnect() handlers prototype Xu Yilun
2025-05-29 5:35 ` [RFC PATCH 26/30] coco/tdx_tsm: Add bind()/unbind()/guest_req() " Xu Yilun
2025-05-29 5:35 ` [RFC PATCH 27/30] PCI/TSM: Add PCI driver callbacks to handle TSM requirements Xu Yilun
2025-06-02 13:06 ` Aneesh Kumar K.V
2025-06-03 5:52 ` Xu Yilun
2025-05-29 5:35 ` [RFC PATCH 28/30] vfio/pci: Implement TSM handlers for MMIO Xu Yilun
2025-05-29 5:35 ` [RFC PATCH 29/30] iommufd/vdevice: Implement TSM handlers for trusted DMA Xu Yilun
2025-05-29 5:35 ` [RFC PATCH 30/30] coco/tdx_tsm: Manage TDX Module enforced operation sequences for Unbind Xu Yilun
2025-06-02 13:37 ` [RFC PATCH 00/30] Host side (KVM/VFIO/IOMMUFD) support for TDISP using TSM Jason Gunthorpe
2025-06-20 4:21 ` Xu Yilun
2025-06-11 1:55 ` Alexey Kardashevskiy
2025-06-21 1:07 ` Alexey Kardashevskiy
2025-06-25 10:45 ` Xu Yilun
2025-07-11 23:08 ` dan.j.williams
2025-07-15 11:09 ` Jonathan Cameron
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=yq5aplfj99x0.fsf@kernel.org \
--to=aneesh.kumar@kernel.org \
--cc=aik@amd.com \
--cc=alex.williamson@redhat.com \
--cc=baolu.lu@linux.intel.com \
--cc=christian.koenig@amd.com \
--cc=dan.j.williams@intel.com \
--cc=daniel.vetter@ffwll.ch \
--cc=dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org \
--cc=iommu@lists.linux.dev \
--cc=jgg@nvidia.com \
--cc=kevin.tian@intel.com \
--cc=kvm@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=leon@kernel.org \
--cc=linaro-mm-sig@lists.linaro.org \
--cc=linux-coco@lists.linux.dev \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-media@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-pci@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=lukas@wunner.de \
--cc=pbonzini@redhat.com \
--cc=seanjc@google.com \
--cc=shameerali.kolothum.thodi@huawei.com \
--cc=simona.vetter@ffwll.ch \
--cc=sumit.semwal@linaro.org \
--cc=tao1.su@intel.com \
--cc=vivek.kasireddy@intel.com \
--cc=yan.y.zhao@intel.com \
--cc=yilun.xu@intel.com \
--cc=yilun.xu@linux.intel.com \
--cc=zhenzhong.duan@intel.com \
--cc=zhiw@nvidia.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.