From: Alex Williamson <alex.williamson@redhat.com>
To: Jacob Pan <jacob.pan@linux.microsoft.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
"iommu@lists.linux.dev" <iommu@lists.linux.dev>,
"Liu, Yi L" <yi.l.liu@intel.com>,
"jgg@nvidia.com" <jgg@nvidia.com>,
Zhang Yu <zhangyu1@microsoft.com>,
Easwar Hariharan <eahariha@linux.microsoft.com>,
Saurabh Sengar <ssengar@linux.microsoft.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 2/2] vfio: Fix unbalanced vfio_df_close call in no-iommu mode
Date: Fri, 13 Jun 2025 16:31:03 -0600 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20250613163103.3bca27cd.alex.williamson@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20250603152343.1104-2-jacob.pan@linux.microsoft.com>
On Tue, 3 Jun 2025 08:23:43 -0700
Jacob Pan <jacob.pan@linux.microsoft.com> wrote:
> From: Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@nvidia.com>
>
> For devices with no-iommu enabled in IOMMUFD VFIO compat mode, the group
> open path skips vfio_df_open(), leaving open_count at 0. This causes a
> warning in vfio_assert_device_open(device) when vfio_df_close() is called
> during group close.
>
> The correct behavior is to skip only the IOMMUFD bind in the device open
> path for no-iommu devices. Commit 6086efe73498 omitted vfio_df_open(),
> which was too broad. This patch restores the previous behavior, ensuring
> the vfio_df_open is called in the group open path.
>
> Fixes: 6086efe73498 ("vfio-iommufd: Move noiommu compat validation out of vfio_iommufd_bind()")
> Signed-off-by: Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@nvidia.com>
> Tested-by: Jacob Pan <jacob.pan@linux.microsoft.com>
> Signed-off-by: Jacob Pan <jacob.pan@linux.microsoft.com>
> ---
> v2: Use a fix from Jason
> ---
> drivers/vfio/group.c | 10 +++++-----
> drivers/vfio/iommufd.c | 3 ---
> drivers/vfio/vfio_main.c | 26 ++++++++++++++++----------
> 3 files changed, 21 insertions(+), 18 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/vfio/group.c b/drivers/vfio/group.c
> index c321d442f0da..8f5fe8a392de 100644
> --- a/drivers/vfio/group.c
> +++ b/drivers/vfio/group.c
> @@ -192,18 +192,18 @@ static int vfio_df_group_open(struct vfio_device_file *df)
> * implies they expected translation to exist
> */
> if (!capable(CAP_SYS_RAWIO) ||
> - vfio_iommufd_device_has_compat_ioas(device, df->iommufd))
> + vfio_iommufd_device_has_compat_ioas(device, df->iommufd)) {
> ret = -EPERM;
> - else
> - ret = 0;
> - goto out_put_kvm;
> + goto out_put_kvm;
> + }
> }
>
> ret = vfio_df_open(df);
> if (ret)
> goto out_put_kvm;
>
> - if (df->iommufd && device->open_count == 1) {
> + if (df->iommufd && device->open_count == 1 &&
> + !vfio_device_is_noiommu(device)) {
Why do we need this?
int vfio_iommufd_compat_attach_ioas(struct vfio_device *vdev,
struct iommufd_ctx *ictx)
{
u32 ioas_id;
int ret;
lockdep_assert_held(&vdev->dev_set->lock);
/* compat noiommu does not need to do ioas attach */
if (vfio_device_is_noiommu(vdev))
return 0;
> ret = vfio_iommufd_compat_attach_ioas(device, df->iommufd);
> if (ret)
> goto out_close_device;
> diff --git a/drivers/vfio/iommufd.c b/drivers/vfio/iommufd.c
> index c8c3a2d53f86..26c9c3068c77 100644
> --- a/drivers/vfio/iommufd.c
> +++ b/drivers/vfio/iommufd.c
> @@ -54,9 +54,6 @@ void vfio_df_iommufd_unbind(struct vfio_device_file *df)
>
> lockdep_assert_held(&vdev->dev_set->lock);
>
> - if (vfio_device_is_noiommu(vdev))
> - return;
> -
Why not keep this and add similar to vfio_df_iommufd_bind()? It seems
cleaner to me. Thanks,
Alex
> if (vdev->ops->unbind_iommufd)
> vdev->ops->unbind_iommufd(vdev);
> }
> diff --git a/drivers/vfio/vfio_main.c b/drivers/vfio/vfio_main.c
> index 5046cae05222..ac2dbd4e5d04 100644
> --- a/drivers/vfio/vfio_main.c
> +++ b/drivers/vfio/vfio_main.c
> @@ -506,17 +506,19 @@ static int vfio_df_device_first_open(struct vfio_device_file *df)
> {
> struct vfio_device *device = df->device;
> struct iommufd_ctx *iommufd = df->iommufd;
> - int ret;
> + int ret = 0;
>
> lockdep_assert_held(&device->dev_set->lock);
>
> if (!try_module_get(device->dev->driver->owner))
> return -ENODEV;
>
> - if (iommufd)
> - ret = vfio_df_iommufd_bind(df);
> - else
> + if (iommufd) {
> + if (!vfio_device_is_noiommu(device))
> + ret = vfio_df_iommufd_bind(df);
> + } else {
> ret = vfio_device_group_use_iommu(device);
> + }
> if (ret)
> goto err_module_put;
>
> @@ -528,10 +530,12 @@ static int vfio_df_device_first_open(struct vfio_device_file *df)
> return 0;
>
> err_unuse_iommu:
> - if (iommufd)
> - vfio_df_iommufd_unbind(df);
> - else
> + if (iommufd) {
> + if (!vfio_device_is_noiommu(device))
> + vfio_df_iommufd_unbind(df);
> + } else {
> vfio_device_group_unuse_iommu(device);
> + }
> err_module_put:
> module_put(device->dev->driver->owner);
> return ret;
> @@ -546,10 +550,12 @@ static void vfio_df_device_last_close(struct vfio_device_file *df)
>
> if (device->ops->close_device)
> device->ops->close_device(device);
> - if (iommufd)
> - vfio_df_iommufd_unbind(df);
> - else
> + if (iommufd) {
> + if (!vfio_device_is_noiommu(device))
> + vfio_df_iommufd_unbind(df);
> + } else {
> vfio_device_group_unuse_iommu(device);
> + }
> module_put(device->dev->driver->owner);
> }
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2025-06-13 22:31 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 14+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2025-06-03 15:23 [PATCH v2 1/2] vfio: Prevent open_count decrement to negative Jacob Pan
2025-06-03 15:23 ` [PATCH v2 2/2] vfio: Fix unbalanced vfio_df_close call in no-iommu mode Jacob Pan
2025-06-13 22:31 ` Alex Williamson [this message]
2025-06-14 0:15 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2025-06-16 14:47 ` Alex Williamson
2025-06-16 15:34 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2025-06-16 19:40 ` Alex Williamson
2025-06-16 20:05 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2025-06-18 23:11 ` Jacob Pan
2025-06-18 23:25 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2025-06-13 22:31 ` [PATCH v2 1/2] vfio: Prevent open_count decrement to negative Alex Williamson
2025-06-14 0:09 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2025-06-16 14:40 ` Alex Williamson
2025-06-18 23:08 ` Jacob Pan
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=20250613163103.3bca27cd.alex.williamson@redhat.com \
--to=alex.williamson@redhat.com \
--cc=eahariha@linux.microsoft.com \
--cc=iommu@lists.linux.dev \
--cc=jacob.pan@linux.microsoft.com \
--cc=jgg@nvidia.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=ssengar@linux.microsoft.com \
--cc=yi.l.liu@intel.com \
--cc=zhangyu1@microsoft.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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox