From: sashiko-bot@kernel.org
To: "Honglei Huang" <honghuan@amd.com>
Cc: virtualization@lists.linux.dev,
"Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@redhat.com>,
dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org,
"Eugenio Perez" <eperezma@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v7 3/4] drm/virtio: implement userptr support for zero-copy memory access
Date: Fri, 18 Sep 2026 02:29:15 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20260918022916.166251F000FF@smtp.kernel.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20260918021154.1432154-4-honghuan@amd.com>
Thank you for your contribution! Sashiko AI review found 3 potential issue(s) to consider:
- [Critical] mm: silent data loss due to missing dirty tracking on unpin
- [Critical] virtgpu: privilege escalation via read-write PRIME export of read-only userptrs
- [High] virtgpu: missing DMA sync for userptr objects causes stale reads
--
commit 419406d5baa93528ec030b7b95cc7d5ada190751
Author: Honglei Huang <honghuan@amd.com>
drm/virtio: implement userptr support for zero-copy memory access
This commit implements userptr support for virtio-gpu by adding a new
virtio_gpu_object_userptr type. It pins user pages via pin_user_pages_fast()
and maps them via the DMA API when required.
> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/virtio/virtgpu_userptr.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/virtio/virtgpu_userptr.c
> new file mode 100644
> index 0000000000000..009755489774c
> --- /dev/null
> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/virtio/virtgpu_userptr.c
> @@ -0,0 +1,335 @@
[ ... ]
> +static const struct drm_gem_object_funcs virtio_gpu_userptr_funcs = {
> + .open = virtio_gpu_gem_object_open,
> + .close = virtio_gpu_gem_object_close,
> + .free = virtio_gpu_userptr_free,
> + .export = virtgpu_gem_prime_export,
> + .get_sg_table = virtio_gpu_userptr_get_sg_table,
> +};
[Severity: Critical]
Is it safe to expose these objects to the PRIME export subsystem without
verifying their read-only status?
If a userptr object is created with VIRTGPU_BLOB_FLAG_USERPTR_RDONLY to pin
read-only memory, userspace could potentially export it via PRIME with
O_RDWR permissions and import it into another device that performs DMA writes.
Could this allow hardware to bypass CPU page table protections and overwrite
read-only system memory or files?
[ ... ]
> +static void
> +virtio_gpu_userptr_put_pages(struct virtio_gpu_object_userptr *userptr)
> +{
[ ... ]
> + if (userptr->pages) {
> + unpin_user_pages(userptr->pages, userptr->npages);
> + kvfree(userptr->pages);
> + userptr->pages = NULL;
> + }
[Severity: Critical]
Are we missing dirty tracking when releasing these pages back to the OS?
If a userptr object is created without the read-only flag, pinned with
FOLL_WRITE, written to by the device, and then destroyed, we call
unpin_user_pages() here without explicitly marking the pages as dirty. If the
pages are file-backed or swapped, could the kernel memory management subsystem
silently discard the data written by the host or device?
[ ... ]
> +int virtio_gpu_userptr_create(struct virtio_gpu_device *vgdev,
> + struct drm_file *file,
> + struct virtio_gpu_object_params *params,
> + struct virtio_gpu_object **bo_ptr)
> +{
[ ... ]
> + /*
> + * Match shmem blobs: only DMA-map when the virtio DMA API is in
> + * use. Mapping unconditionally can create SWIOTLB bounce buffers
> + * that get copied back over guest pages on unmap even though the
> + * host was given sg_phys() addresses.
> + */
> + if (virtio_gpu_use_dma_api(vgdev->vdev)) {
> + enum dma_data_direction dir =
> + (userptr->flags & VIRTGPU_BLOB_FLAG_USERPTR_RDONLY) ?
> + DMA_TO_DEVICE : DMA_BIDIRECTIONAL;
> +
> + ret = dma_map_sgtable(drm_dev_dma_dev(vgdev->ddev), sgt,
> + dir, 0);
[Severity: High]
How does this DMA-mapped memory get synchronized to avoid stale reads?
When mapping with DMA_BIDIRECTIONAL and the guest modifies the userptr memory,
the host might read stale data from bounce buffers unless a DMA sync occurs.
However, in virtio_gpu_cmd_transfer_to_host_3d() and 2d transfers, the sync
check looks like this:
if (virtio_gpu_is_shmem(bo) && use_dma_api)
dma_sync_sgtable_for_device(vgdev->vdev->dev.parent,
bo->base.sgt, DMA_TO_DEVICE);
Since virtio_gpu_is_shmem() evaluates to false for userptr objects, they
appear to be excluded from this synchronization. Will this skip cause the
host to read stale data during transfers?
> + if (ret)
> + goto err_cleanup;
> +
> + userptr->dma_dir = dir;
> + userptr->dma_mapped = true;
> + }
--
Sashiko AI review · https://sashiko.dev/#/patchset/20260918021154.1432154-1-honghuan@amd.com?part=3
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-09-18 2:29 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-09-18 2:11 [PATCH v7 0/4] virtio-gpu: Add userptr support for compute workloads Honglei Huang
2026-09-18 2:11 ` [PATCH v7 1/4] drm/virtio-gpu: Add VIRTIO_GPU_CAPSET_ROCM capability Honglei Huang
2026-09-18 2:16 ` sashiko-bot
2026-09-18 2:11 ` [PATCH v7 2/4] drm/virtgpu api: add blob userptr resource Honglei Huang
2026-09-18 2:19 ` sashiko-bot
2026-09-18 2:11 ` [PATCH v7 3/4] drm/virtio: implement userptr support for zero-copy memory access Honglei Huang
2026-09-18 2:29 ` sashiko-bot [this message]
2026-09-18 2:11 ` [PATCH v7 4/4] drm/virtio: wire blob ioctl creation to userptr objects Honglei Huang
2026-09-18 2:23 ` sashiko-bot
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=20260918022916.166251F000FF@smtp.kernel.org \
--to=sashiko-bot@kernel.org \
--cc=dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org \
--cc=eperezma@redhat.com \
--cc=honghuan@amd.com \
--cc=mst@redhat.com \
--cc=sashiko-reviews@lists.linux.dev \
--cc=virtualization@lists.linux.dev \
/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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox