From: sashiko-bot@kernel.org
To: "Omar Elghoul" <oelghoul@linux.ibm.com>
Cc: kvm@vger.kernel.org, linux-s390@vger.kernel.org,
"Vasily Gorbik" <gor@linux.ibm.com>,
"Heiko Carstens" <hca@linux.ibm.com>,
"Alexander Gordeev" <agordeev@linux.ibm.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 3/4] vfio-pci/zdev: Add VFIO FMB device features
Date: Fri, 12 Jun 2026 18:28:54 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20260612182854.97E641F000E9@smtp.kernel.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20260612181048.91548-4-oelghoul@linux.ibm.com>
Thank you for your contribution! Sashiko AI review found 2 potential issue(s) to consider:
- [High] Holding `zdev->fmb_lock` across user memory accesses allows a malicious userspace process to stall host device management.
- [Medium] Enabling the FMB feature via `VFIO_DEVICE_FEATURE_ZPCI_FMB_ENABLE` will unconditionally fail with `-EINVAL` on a newly opened device.
--
commit 67b6ef61b40cb8ad6b8fa03e4587c893d168c03d
Author: Omar Elghoul <oelghoul@linux.ibm.com>
vfio-pci/zdev: Add VFIO FMB device features
Introduce new VFIO features for zPCI devices to provide FMB passthrough to
userspace. Allow the user to enable or disable the FMB using the SET-only
feature VFIO_DEVICE_FEATURE_ZPCI_FMB_ENABLE and read it using the GET-only
feature VFIO_DEVICE_FEATURE_ZPCI_FMB_READ.
[ ... ]
> diff --git a/drivers/vfio/pci/vfio_pci_zdev.c b/drivers/vfio/pci/vfio_pci_zdev.c
> index 0990fdb146b78..ad1bcaf52ff24 100644
> --- a/drivers/vfio/pci/vfio_pci_zdev.c
> +++ b/drivers/vfio/pci/vfio_pci_zdev.c
> @@ -167,3 +167,58 @@ void vfio_pci_zdev_close_device(struct vfio_pci_core_device *vdev)
> if (zpci_kvm_hook.kvm_unregister)
> zpci_kvm_hook.kvm_unregister(zdev);
> }
> +
> +int vfio_pci_zdev_feature_fmb_enable(struct vfio_pci_core_device *vdev, u32 flags,
> + void __user *arg, size_t argsz)
> +{
> + struct zpci_dev *zdev;
> + struct vfio_device_feature_zpci_fmb_enable fmb_enable;
> + int ret;
> +
> + ret = vfio_check_feature(flags, argsz, VFIO_DEVICE_FEATURE_SET, sizeof(fmb_enable));
> + if (ret != 1)
> + return ret;
> +
> + zdev = to_zpci(vdev->pdev);
> + if (!zdev)
> + return -ENODEV;
> +
> + if (copy_from_user(&fmb_enable, arg, sizeof(fmb_enable)))
> + return -EFAULT;
> +
> + guard(mutex)(&zdev->fmb_lock);
> +
> + if (fmb_enable.enabled)
> + return zpci_fmb_enable_device(zdev);
[Severity: Medium]
Will enabling this feature fail with -EINVAL on a newly opened device?
When userspace opens a VFIO device, vfio_pci_core_enable() automatically
enables the physical device via pci_enable_device(). On s390,
pcibios_enable_device() unconditionally calls zpci_fmb_enable_device(),
which successfully allocates zdev->fmb.
If userspace subsequently attempts to enable the FMB feature via this ioctl,
it calls into zpci_fmb_enable_device() again:
arch/s390/pci/pci.c:zpci_fmb_enable_device() {
...
if (zdev->fmb || sizeof(*zdev->fmb) < zdev->fmb_length)
return -EINVAL;
...
}
Does this make it impossible for userspace to explicitly enable the feature
without first disabling it?
> + return zpci_fmb_disable_device(zdev);
> +}
> +
> +int vfio_pci_zdev_feature_fmb_read(struct vfio_pci_core_device *vdev, u32 flags,
> + void __user *arg, size_t argsz)
> +{
> + struct zpci_dev *zdev;
> + struct vfio_device_feature_zpci_fmb_read fmb_read;
> + int ret;
> +
> + ret = vfio_check_feature(flags, argsz, VFIO_DEVICE_FEATURE_GET, sizeof(fmb_read));
> + if (ret != 1)
> + return ret;
> +
> + zdev = to_zpci(vdev->pdev);
> + if (!zdev)
> + return -ENODEV;
> +
> + guard(mutex)(&zdev->fmb_lock);
> +
> + if (!zdev->fmb)
> + return -ENOMSG;
> + if (copy_from_user(&fmb_read, arg, sizeof(fmb_read)))
> + return -EFAULT;
> + if (!fmb_read.data)
> + return -EINVAL;
> +
> + if (copy_to_user((struct zpci_fmb __user *) fmb_read.data, zdev->fmb, zdev->fmb_length))
> + return -EFAULT;
[Severity: High]
Can holding this lock across user memory accesses cause a denial of service?
A malicious userspace process could provide a userfaultfd-backed memory
region for arg or fmb_read.data to intentionally stall the thread
indefinitely while holding zdev->fmb_lock.
Since pcibios_disable_device() also requires this lock during device
teardown, would this stall permanently block the host from hot-unplugging
the PCI device or unbinding the VFIO driver?
> +
> + return 0;
> +}
[ ... ]
--
Sashiko AI review · https://sashiko.dev/#/patchset/20260612181048.91548-1-oelghoul@linux.ibm.com?part=3
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-06-12 18:28 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-06-12 18:10 [PATCH v4 0/4] vfio-pci/zdev: Improved zPCI Function Measurement Support Omar Elghoul
2026-06-12 18:10 ` [PATCH v4 1/4] s390/pci: Hold fmb_lock when enabling or disabling PCI devices Omar Elghoul
2026-06-12 18:28 ` sashiko-bot
2026-06-12 18:10 ` [PATCH v4 2/4] s390/pci: Preserve FMB state in device re-enablement Omar Elghoul
2026-06-12 18:26 ` sashiko-bot
2026-06-12 18:10 ` [PATCH v4 3/4] vfio-pci/zdev: Add VFIO FMB device features Omar Elghoul
2026-06-12 18:28 ` sashiko-bot [this message]
2026-06-12 18:10 ` [PATCH v4 4/4] s390/pci: Fence FMB enable/disable via sysfs for passthrough devices Omar Elghoul
2026-06-12 18:22 ` 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=20260612182854.97E641F000E9@smtp.kernel.org \
--to=sashiko-bot@kernel.org \
--cc=agordeev@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=gor@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=hca@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=kvm@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-s390@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=oelghoul@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=sashiko-reviews@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