[PATCH] iommufd: Do not allow _iommufd_object_alloc_ucmd if abort op is set

[PATCH] iommufd: Do not allow _iommufd_object_alloc_ucmd if abort op is set

[Nicolin Chen]

An abort op was introduced to allow its caller to invoke it within a lock
in the caller's function. On the other hand, _iommufd_object_alloc_ucmd()
would invoke the abort op in iommufd_object_abort_and_destroy() that must
be outside the caller's lock. So, these two cannot work together.

Add a validation in the _iommufd_object_alloc_ucmd(). Pick -EOPNOTSUPP to
reject the function call, indicating that the object allocator is buggy.

Suggested-by: Xu Yilun <yilun.xu@linux.intel.com>
Signed-off-by: Nicolin Chen <nicolinc@nvidia.com>
---
 drivers/iommu/iommufd/main.c | 9 +++++++++
 1 file changed, 9 insertions(+)

diff --git a/drivers/iommu/iommufd/main.c b/drivers/iommu/iommufd/main.c
index 0fb81a905cb1..69c2195e77ca 100644
--- a/drivers/iommu/iommufd/main.c
+++ b/drivers/iommu/iommufd/main.c
@@ -71,6 +71,15 @@ struct iommufd_object *_iommufd_object_alloc_ucmd(struct iommufd_ucmd *ucmd,
 	if (WARN_ON(ucmd->new_obj))
 		return ERR_PTR(-EBUSY);
 
+	/*
+	 * An abort op means that its caller needs to invoke it within a lock in
+	 * the caller. So it doesn't work with _iommufd_object_alloc_ucmd() that
+	 * will invoke the abort op in iommufd_object_abort_and_destroy(), which
+	 * must be outside the caller's lock.
+	 */
+	if (WARN_ON(iommufd_object_ops[type].abort))
+		return ERR_PTR(-EOPNOTSUPP);
+
 	new_obj = _iommufd_object_alloc(ucmd->ictx, size, type);
 	if (IS_ERR(new_obj))
 		return new_obj;
-- 
2.43.0

RE: [PATCH] iommufd: Do not allow _iommufd_object_alloc_ucmd if abort op is set

[Tian, Kevin]

> From: Nicolin Chen <nicolinc@nvidia.com>
> Sent: Friday, July 11, 2025 4:24 AM
> 
> An abort op was introduced to allow its caller to invoke it within a lock
> in the caller's function. On the other hand, _iommufd_object_alloc_ucmd()
> would invoke the abort op in iommufd_object_abort_and_destroy() that
> must
> be outside the caller's lock. So, these two cannot work together.
> 
> Add a validation in the _iommufd_object_alloc_ucmd(). Pick -EOPNOTSUPP
> to
> reject the function call, indicating that the object allocator is buggy.
> 
> Suggested-by: Xu Yilun <yilun.xu@linux.intel.com>
> Signed-off-by: Nicolin Chen <nicolinc@nvidia.com>

Reviewed-by: Kevin Tian <kevin.tian@intel.com>

Re: [PATCH] iommufd: Do not allow _iommufd_object_alloc_ucmd if abort op is set

[Xu Yilun]

On Fri, Jul 11, 2025 at 03:18:53AM +0000, Tian, Kevin wrote:
> > From: Nicolin Chen <nicolinc@nvidia.com>
> > Sent: Friday, July 11, 2025 4:24 AM
> > 
> > An abort op was introduced to allow its caller to invoke it within a lock
> > in the caller's function. On the other hand, _iommufd_object_alloc_ucmd()
> > would invoke the abort op in iommufd_object_abort_and_destroy() that
> > must
> > be outside the caller's lock. So, these two cannot work together.
> > 
> > Add a validation in the _iommufd_object_alloc_ucmd(). Pick -EOPNOTSUPP
> > to
> > reject the function call, indicating that the object allocator is buggy.
> > 
> > Suggested-by: Xu Yilun <yilun.xu@linux.intel.com>
> > Signed-off-by: Nicolin Chen <nicolinc@nvidia.com>
> 
> Reviewed-by: Kevin Tian <kevin.tian@intel.com>

Reviewed-by: Xu Yilun <yilun.xu@linux.intel.com>

Re: [PATCH] iommufd: Do not allow _iommufd_object_alloc_ucmd if abort op is set

[Jason Gunthorpe]

On Thu, Jul 10, 2025 at 01:23:54PM -0700, Nicolin Chen wrote:
> An abort op was introduced to allow its caller to invoke it within a lock
> in the caller's function. On the other hand, _iommufd_object_alloc_ucmd()
> would invoke the abort op in iommufd_object_abort_and_destroy() that must
> be outside the caller's lock. So, these two cannot work together.
> 
> Add a validation in the _iommufd_object_alloc_ucmd(). Pick -EOPNOTSUPP to
> reject the function call, indicating that the object allocator is buggy.
> 
> Suggested-by: Xu Yilun <yilun.xu@linux.intel.com>
> Signed-off-by: Nicolin Chen <nicolinc@nvidia.com>
> ---
>  drivers/iommu/iommufd/main.c | 9 +++++++++
>  1 file changed, 9 insertions(+)

Applied

Thanks,
Jason