Linux-ARM-Kernel Archive on lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Pranjal Shrivastava <praan@google.com>
To: Vasant Hegde <vasant.hegde@amd.com>
Cc: Ankit Soni <Ankit.Soni@amd.com>,
	iommu@lists.linux.dev, linux-pci@vger.kernel.org,
	linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Joerg Roedel <joro@8bytes.org>,
	Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>,
	Bjorn Helgaas <bhelgaas@google.com>,
	David Woodhouse <dwmw2@infradead.org>,
	Lu Baolu <baolu.lu@linux.intel.com>,
	Robin Murphy <robin.murphy@arm.com>,
	Suravee Suthikulpanit <suravee.suthikulpanit@amd.com>,
	Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@ziepe.ca>,
	Nicolin Chen <nicolinc@nvidia.com>,
	David Matlack <dmatlack@google.com>,
	Samiullah Khawaja <skhawaja@google.com>,
	Daniel Mentz <danielmentz@google.com>,
	Pasha Tatashin <pasha.tatashin@soleen.com>,
	Mostafa Saleh <smostafa@google.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v6 6/6] iommu/amd: Fail probe on ATS configuration failure
Date: Mon, 1 Jun 2026 10:41:14 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <ah1hyp0oB5iJenQt@google.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <6086ebd5-4538-4b85-bbd3-84df9c6198d2@amd.com>

On Mon, Jun 01, 2026 at 02:58:11PM +0530, Vasant Hegde wrote:
> Hi Pranjal,
> 
> On 6/1/2026 11:50 AM, Pranjal Shrivastava wrote:
> > On Mon, Jun 01, 2026 at 06:00:15AM +0000, Ankit Soni wrote:
> > 
[...]
> > Hi Ankit,
> > 
> > Ack. Sashiko made me realize that this regresses IRQ mapping for AMD,
> > and I agree that the call to iommu_ignore_device() is a bit too 
> > aggressive as it  wipes the rlookup_table entry required for IRQ 
> > remapping, particularly in PD_MODE_NONE.
> > 
> > I was thinkig to address this in the next version as follows:
> > 
> > 1. Split the probe error paths:
> >    - Proper init failures (like iommu_init_device) will continue to call
> >      iommu_ignore_device(). I will fix the double invocation here.
> > 
> >    - Config failures (like ATS mismatch or PD_MODE_NONE) will return an
> >      an error but skip caling  iommu_ignore_device(), preserving the
> >      rlookup_table entry for IRQ remapping.
> 
> I was reviewing v5 last Friday and decided to fix probe() code as its been long
> time I wanted to cleanup this code.  I have a patch series which pretty much
> does this.
> 
> I haven't fixed iommu_ignore_device() code, but should be simple to fix it.
> we can use amd_iommu_make_clear_dte / amd_iommu_update_dte. It will set the
> dte.tv=0 and essentially blocks all DMAs.
> 
> If you already have the patches then please go ahead, else I can post the series
> this week.

Hi Vasant,

I have drafted the fixes (including the alias clearing order and the 
atomic DTE updates for iommu_ignore_device), 

I'll go ahead and post them as a separate preparatory series soon.
I'm also happy to incorporate any of your existing patches if you'd
like?

> 
> 
> > 
> > 2. Resolve the Use-After-Free (UAF):
> >    To prevent the UAF on the "DMA-only" failure path, I will ensure that
> >    the hardware Device Table Entry (DTE) is set to a safe state (like
> >    blocked or bypass) and the dev_data->dev pointer is cleared, as the
> >    IOMMU core does not invoke release_device() after a probe failure.
> > 
> > 3. Fix iommu_ignore_device() infrastructure:
> >    I will address the pre-existing bugs identified by Sashiko:
> >    - Fix clearing order (calling setup_aliases before clearing the
> >      rlookup_table).
> >    - Replace the non-atomic memset() on the hardware dev_table with an
> >      atomic DTE update.
> > 
> > That said, I'm investigating the safest way to revert the MSI domain
> > assignment on probe failure to avoid the dangling domain issue pointed
> > out by Sashiko. Maybe we can add an amd_iommu_restore_msi_domain() helper
> > to revert the assignment made in amd_iommu_set_pci_msi_domain() on probe
> > failure?
> > 
> > Please, let me know if that sounds okay?
> > 
> > Also, I'm wondering if I should send this as a separate series specific 
> > to AMD which is unrelated to this one? Or maybe handle AMD IOMMU in a
> > separate series altogether. Let me know if you (and Vasanth / Suravee) 
> > would prefer that?
> 
> Lets separate out AMD fixes part as its not related to this series.
> 
> If you want to keep this patch then just the "iommu_ignore_device" part that
> should be OK -OR- if you want to drop entirely and pick it up with AMD specific
> series that's also works for me.

Ack. I guess a separate series to handle AMD IOMMU sounds better. I'll
post one soon.

Thanks,
Praan


      reply	other threads:[~2026-06-01 10:41 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 17+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2026-05-29 11:12 [PATCH v6 0/6] iommu: Standardize ATS robustness and state tracking Pranjal Shrivastava
2026-05-29 11:12 ` [PATCH v6 1/6] PCI/ATS: Ensure pci_ats_supported() is PF-aware for VFs Pranjal Shrivastava
2026-05-29 11:12 ` [PATCH v6 2/6] PCI/ATS: Validate STU for VFs in pci_prepare_ats() Pranjal Shrivastava
2026-05-29 11:12 ` [PATCH v6 3/6] PCI/ATS: Mandate checking pci_ats_supported() before pci_prepare_ats() Pranjal Shrivastava
2026-05-29 21:56   ` Nicolin Chen
2026-05-31 17:06     ` Pranjal Shrivastava
2026-05-29 11:12 ` [PATCH v6 4/6] iommu/arm-smmu-v3: Standardize ATS enablement failure reporting Pranjal Shrivastava
2026-05-29 21:51   ` Nicolin Chen
2026-05-31 17:13     ` Pranjal Shrivastava
2026-05-29 11:12 ` [PATCH v6 5/6] iommu/vt-d: Fail probe on ATS configuration failure Pranjal Shrivastava
2026-05-29 11:12 ` [PATCH v6 6/6] iommu/amd: " Pranjal Shrivastava
2026-06-01  6:00   ` Ankit Soni
2026-06-01  6:20     ` Pranjal Shrivastava
2026-06-01  8:17       ` Ankit Soni
2026-06-01 10:35         ` Pranjal Shrivastava
2026-06-01  9:28       ` Vasant Hegde
2026-06-01 10:41         ` Pranjal Shrivastava [this message]

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=ah1hyp0oB5iJenQt@google.com \
    --to=praan@google.com \
    --cc=Ankit.Soni@amd.com \
    --cc=baolu.lu@linux.intel.com \
    --cc=bhelgaas@google.com \
    --cc=danielmentz@google.com \
    --cc=dmatlack@google.com \
    --cc=dwmw2@infradead.org \
    --cc=iommu@lists.linux.dev \
    --cc=jgg@ziepe.ca \
    --cc=joro@8bytes.org \
    --cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-pci@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=nicolinc@nvidia.com \
    --cc=pasha.tatashin@soleen.com \
    --cc=robin.murphy@arm.com \
    --cc=skhawaja@google.com \
    --cc=smostafa@google.com \
    --cc=suravee.suthikulpanit@amd.com \
    --cc=vasant.hegde@amd.com \
    --cc=will@kernel.org \
    /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