From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from smtp.kernel.org (aws-us-west-2-korg-mail-1.web.codeaurora.org [10.30.226.201]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4962338F92A; Thu, 26 Feb 2026 07:58:10 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=10.30.226.201 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1772092691; cv=none; b=Cb5G+fn6/xqAQQGirJiBu2agL7T+DmTjhPZUzfy+7nt5vD9sFSgFxld2S8jACOuh632VeuizRTtJseZDD8FC3WqihiuF+B0p0+FU6gwSTohxFxt6V/6cGcXPUJ2CkPlf2kei9QeTpRkXi89Kp5oazhDPcDTfKAD+JJ74MFzeFw8= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1772092691; c=relaxed/simple; bh=hwHQ4BRTp4F0JOLYb4176Dt2qXHf/97NMLc4rVMaBHI=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=uYd9eDQ8X9aYPhqPAzf6uFEBryb1uUbqzfrfrf7f9gm9beprMKV1wH5gGHZl5sobPS0NbMrcBHYa1In40qAxdbKZ+mAukE16/Uwuc8JBA/MP+g5r0H5rr97YZw+IODIqItHY4LbBhLc7q0If4BB0XY7ppyOPfh2Mv6ErrCn0Py0= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b=Zc1/CqtJ; arc=none smtp.client-ip=10.30.226.201 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b="Zc1/CqtJ" Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 23668C19422; Thu, 26 Feb 2026 07:58:09 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=k20201202; t=1772092690; bh=hwHQ4BRTp4F0JOLYb4176Dt2qXHf/97NMLc4rVMaBHI=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:From; b=Zc1/CqtJ2lX1ikU1tRuGiLCcSf+PJcmQp27jY1UVT8mEhBa0T7oK+fzCGVBeZsnTp y57Hm4DKDShkuemMzKtTTD22AIzdkwAkI/Zh/EaCqzfKLjjTjMMwqeIKxG5MPinOyB +Ua2UOxErR6UkS9HiaYRC8ewYWmTy69fEgQVMDp1XNvm+wbugf4un4dWktqraeOfuJ bmFGDIk24OO+ugM8aNKQuQ1DFb6el5T2YXMfJrDaE8aGHS2my8BNOJmsZTvgdMk/04 F46UtHTWtsIjlkIKgoLOgYn0YWEPuXM0+VUczSP0rxBwQzQwkfPCYF3jEIEug39BTT MU9wptbR55eFw== Date: Thu, 26 Feb 2026 09:58:06 +0200 From: Leon Romanovsky To: Pranjal Shrivastava Cc: Ashish Mhetre , robin.murphy@arm.com, joro@8bytes.org, will@kernel.org, iommu@lists.linux.dev, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-tegra@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC] iommu/dma: Validate page before accessing P2PDMA state Message-ID: <20260226075806.GE12611@unreal> References: <20260224104257.1641429-1-amhetre@nvidia.com> <20260224123221.GM10607@unreal> <9d01b4e3-be5b-4c9c-8088-1d10f67f1fd8@nvidia.com> <20260225075609.GB9541@unreal> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: iommu@lists.linux.dev List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit In-Reply-To: On Wed, Feb 25, 2026 at 08:11:29PM +0000, Pranjal Shrivastava wrote: > On Wed, Feb 25, 2026 at 09:56:09AM +0200, Leon Romanovsky wrote: > > On Wed, Feb 25, 2026 at 10:19:41AM +0530, Ashish Mhetre wrote: > > > > > > > > > On 2/25/2026 2:27 AM, Pranjal Shrivastava wrote: > > > > External email: Use caution opening links or attachments > > > > > > > > > > > > On Tue, Feb 24, 2026 at 02:32:21PM +0200, Leon Romanovsky wrote: > > > > > On Tue, Feb 24, 2026 at 10:42:57AM +0000, Ashish Mhetre wrote: > > > > > > When mapping scatter-gather entries that reference reserved > > > > > > memory regions without struct page backing (e.g., bootloader created > > > > > > carveouts), is_pci_p2pdma_page() dereferences the page pointer > > > > > > returned by sg_page() without first verifying its validity. > > > > > I believe this behavior started after commit 88df6ab2f34b > > > > > ("mm: add folio_is_pci_p2pdma()"). Prior to that change, the > > > > > is_zone_device_page(page) check would return false when given a > > > > > non‑existent page pointer. > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks Leon for the review. This crash started after commit 30280eee2db1 > > > ("iommu/dma: support PCI P2PDMA pages in dma-iommu map_sg"). > > > > > > > Doesn't folio_is_pci_p2pdma() also check for zone device? > > > > I see[1] that it does: > > > > > > > > static inline bool folio_is_pci_p2pdma(const struct folio *folio) > > > > { > > > > return IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_PCI_P2PDMA) && > > > > folio_is_zone_device(folio) && > > > > folio->pgmap->type == MEMORY_DEVICE_PCI_P2PDMA; > > > > } > > > > > > > > I believe the problem arises due to the page_folio() call in > > > > folio_is_pci_p2pdma(page_folio(page)); within is_pci_p2pdma_page(). > > > > page_folio() assumes it has a valid struct page to work with. For these > > > > carveouts, that isn't true. > > > > > > > > Potentially something like the following would stop the crash: > > > > > > > > diff --git a/include/linux/memremap.h b/include/linux/memremap.h > > > > index e3c2ccf872a8..e47876021afa 100644 > > > > --- a/include/linux/memremap.h > > > > +++ b/include/linux/memremap.h > > > > @@ -197,7 +197,8 @@ static inline void folio_set_zone_device_data(struct folio *folio, void *data) > > > > > > > > static inline bool is_pci_p2pdma_page(const struct page *page) > > > > { > > > > - return IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_PCI_P2PDMA) && > > > > + return IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_PCI_P2PDMA) && page && > > > > + pfn_valid(page_to_pfn(page)) && > > > > folio_is_pci_p2pdma(page_folio(page)); > > > > } > > > > > > > > > > Yes, this will also fix the crash. > > > > > > > But my broader question is: why are we calling a page-based API like > > > > is_pci_p2pdma_page() on non-struct-page memory in the first place? > > > > Could we instead add a helper to verify if the sg_page() return value > > > > is actually backed by a struct page? If it isn't, we should arguably > > > > skip the P2PDMA logic entirely and fall back to a dma_map_phys style > > > > path. Isn't handling these "pageless" physical ranges the primary reason > > > > dma_map_phys exists? > > > > > > Thanks for the feedback, Pranjal. > > > > > > To clarify: are you suggesting we handle non-page-backed mappings inside > > > iommu_dma_map_sg (within dma-iommu), or that callers should detect > > > non-page-backed memory and use dma_map_phys instead of dma_map_sg? > > > > The latter one. > > > > Yup, I meant the latter. > > > > Former approach sounds better so that existing iommu_dma_map_sg callers > > > don't need changes, but I'd like to confirm your preference. > > > > The bug is in callers which used wrong API, they need to be adapted. > > Yes, the thing is, if the caller already knows that the region to be > mapped is NOT struct page-backed, then why does it use dma_map_sg > variants? Before dma_map_phys() was added, there was no reliable way to DMA‑map such memory, and using dma_map_sg() was a workaround that happened to work. I'm not sure whether it worked by design or by accident, but the correct approach now is to use dma_map_phys(). Thanks > > Thanks > Praan