From: Alex Williamson <alex@shazbot.org>
To: Matt Evans <mattev@meta.com>
Cc: "Leon Romanovsky" <leon@kernel.org>,
"Jason Gunthorpe" <jgg@nvidia.com>,
"Alex Mastro" <amastro@fb.com>,
"Mahmoud Adam" <mngyadam@amazon.de>,
"David Matlack" <dmatlack@google.com>,
"Björn Töpel" <bjorn@kernel.org>,
"Sumit Semwal" <sumit.semwal@linaro.org>,
"Christian König" <christian.koenig@amd.com>,
"Kevin Tian" <kevin.tian@intel.com>,
"Ankit Agrawal" <ankita@nvidia.com>,
"Pranjal Shrivastava" <praan@google.com>,
"Alistair Popple" <apopple@nvidia.com>,
"Vivek Kasireddy" <vivek.kasireddy@intel.com>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-media@vger.kernel.org,
dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org, linaro-mm-sig@lists.linaro.org,
kvm@vger.kernel.org, alex@shazbot.org
Subject: Re: [RFC v2 PATCH 04/10] vfio/pci: Add a helper to create a DMABUF for a BAR-map VMA
Date: Wed, 18 Mar 2026 14:04:08 -0600 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20260318140408.4677fff5@shazbot.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20260312184613.3710705-5-mattev@meta.com>
On Thu, 12 Mar 2026 11:46:02 -0700
Matt Evans <mattev@meta.com> wrote:
> This helper, vfio_pci_core_mmap_prep_dmabuf(), creates a single-range
> DMABUF for the purpose of mapping a PCI BAR. This is used in a future
> commit by VFIO's ordinary mmap() path.
>
> This function transfers ownership of the VFIO device fd to the
> DMABUF, which fput()s when it's released.
>
> Refactor the existing vfio_pci_core_feature_dma_buf() to split out
> export code common to the two paths, VFIO_DEVICE_FEATURE_DMA_BUF and
> this new VFIO_BAR mmap().
>
> Signed-off-by: Matt Evans <mattev@meta.com>
> ---
> drivers/vfio/pci/vfio_pci_dmabuf.c | 131 +++++++++++++++++++++--------
> drivers/vfio/pci/vfio_pci_priv.h | 4 +
> 2 files changed, 102 insertions(+), 33 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/vfio/pci/vfio_pci_dmabuf.c b/drivers/vfio/pci/vfio_pci_dmabuf.c
> index 63140528dbea..76db340ba592 100644
> --- a/drivers/vfio/pci/vfio_pci_dmabuf.c
> +++ b/drivers/vfio/pci/vfio_pci_dmabuf.c
> @@ -82,6 +82,8 @@ static void vfio_pci_dma_buf_release(struct dma_buf *dmabuf)
> up_write(&priv->vdev->memory_lock);
> vfio_device_put_registration(&priv->vdev->vdev);
> }
> + if (priv->vfile)
> + fput(priv->vfile);
> kfree(priv->phys_vec);
> kfree(priv);
> }
> @@ -182,6 +184,41 @@ int vfio_pci_dma_buf_find_pfn(struct vfio_pci_dma_buf *vpdmabuf,
> return -EFAULT;
> }
>
> +static int vfio_pci_dmabuf_export(struct vfio_pci_core_device *vdev,
> + struct vfio_pci_dma_buf *priv, uint32_t flags,
> + size_t size, bool status_ok)
> +{
> + DEFINE_DMA_BUF_EXPORT_INFO(exp_info);
> +
> + if (!vfio_device_try_get_registration(&vdev->vdev))
> + return -ENODEV;
> +
> + exp_info.ops = &vfio_pci_dmabuf_ops;
> + exp_info.size = size;
> + exp_info.flags = flags;
> + exp_info.priv = priv;
> +
> + priv->dmabuf = dma_buf_export(&exp_info);
> + if (IS_ERR(priv->dmabuf)) {
> + vfio_device_put_registration(&vdev->vdev);
> + return PTR_ERR(priv->dmabuf);
> + }
> +
> + kref_init(&priv->kref);
> + init_completion(&priv->comp);
> +
> + /* dma_buf_put() now frees priv */
> + INIT_LIST_HEAD(&priv->dmabufs_elm);
> + down_write(&vdev->memory_lock);
> + dma_resv_lock(priv->dmabuf->resv, NULL);
> + priv->revoked = !status_ok;
Testing __vfio_pci_memory_enabled() outside of memory_lock() is
invalid, so passing it as a parameter outside of the semaphore is
invalid. @status_ok is stale here.
> + list_add_tail(&priv->dmabufs_elm, &vdev->dmabufs);
> + dma_resv_unlock(priv->dmabuf->resv);
> + up_write(&vdev->memory_lock);
> +
> + return 0;
> +}
> +
> /*
> * This is a temporary "private interconnect" between VFIO DMABUF and iommufd.
> * It allows the two co-operating drivers to exchange the physical address of
> @@ -300,7 +337,6 @@ int vfio_pci_core_feature_dma_buf(struct vfio_pci_core_device *vdev, u32 flags,
> {
> struct vfio_device_feature_dma_buf get_dma_buf = {};
> struct vfio_region_dma_range *dma_ranges;
> - DEFINE_DMA_BUF_EXPORT_INFO(exp_info);
> struct vfio_pci_dma_buf *priv;
> size_t length;
> int ret;
> @@ -369,46 +405,20 @@ int vfio_pci_core_feature_dma_buf(struct vfio_pci_core_device *vdev, u32 flags,
> kfree(dma_ranges);
> dma_ranges = NULL;
>
> - if (!vfio_device_try_get_registration(&vdev->vdev)) {
> - ret = -ENODEV;
> + ret = vfio_pci_dmabuf_export(vdev, priv, get_dma_buf.open_flags,
> + priv->size,
> + __vfio_pci_memory_enabled(vdev));
> + if (ret)
> goto err_free_phys;
> - }
> -
> - exp_info.ops = &vfio_pci_dmabuf_ops;
> - exp_info.size = priv->size;
> - exp_info.flags = get_dma_buf.open_flags;
> - exp_info.priv = priv;
> -
> - priv->dmabuf = dma_buf_export(&exp_info);
> - if (IS_ERR(priv->dmabuf)) {
> - ret = PTR_ERR(priv->dmabuf);
> - goto err_dev_put;
> - }
> -
> - kref_init(&priv->kref);
> - init_completion(&priv->comp);
> -
> - /* dma_buf_put() now frees priv */
> - INIT_LIST_HEAD(&priv->dmabufs_elm);
> - down_write(&vdev->memory_lock);
> - dma_resv_lock(priv->dmabuf->resv, NULL);
> - priv->revoked = !__vfio_pci_memory_enabled(vdev);
Tested under memory_lock. It was correct previously.
> - list_add_tail(&priv->dmabufs_elm, &vdev->dmabufs);
> - dma_resv_unlock(priv->dmabuf->resv);
> - up_write(&vdev->memory_lock);
> -
> /*
> * dma_buf_fd() consumes the reference, when the file closes the dmabuf
> * will be released.
> */
> ret = dma_buf_fd(priv->dmabuf, get_dma_buf.open_flags);
> - if (ret < 0)
> - goto err_dma_buf;
> - return ret;
> + if (ret >= 0)
> + return ret;
>
> -err_dma_buf:
> dma_buf_put(priv->dmabuf);
> -err_dev_put:
> vfio_device_put_registration(&vdev->vdev);
> err_free_phys:
> kfree(priv->phys_vec);
> @@ -419,6 +429,61 @@ int vfio_pci_core_feature_dma_buf(struct vfio_pci_core_device *vdev, u32 flags,
> return ret;
> }
>
> +int vfio_pci_core_mmap_prep_dmabuf(struct vfio_pci_core_device *vdev,
> + struct vm_area_struct *vma,
> + u64 phys_start,
> + u64 pgoff,
> + u64 req_len)
> +{
> + struct vfio_pci_dma_buf *priv;
> + const unsigned int nr_ranges = 1;
> + int ret;
> +
> + priv = kzalloc(sizeof(*priv), GFP_KERNEL);
> + if (!priv)
> + return -ENOMEM;
> +
> + priv->phys_vec = kcalloc(nr_ranges, sizeof(*priv->phys_vec),
> + GFP_KERNEL);
> + if (!priv->phys_vec) {
> + ret = -ENOMEM;
> + goto err_free_priv;
> + }
> +
> + priv->vdev = vdev;
> + priv->nr_ranges = nr_ranges;
> + priv->size = req_len;
> + priv->phys_vec[0].paddr = phys_start + (pgoff << PAGE_SHIFT);
> + priv->phys_vec[0].len = req_len;
> +
> + /*
> + * Creates a DMABUF, adds it to vdev->dmabufs list for
> + * tracking (meaning cleanup or revocation will zap them), and
> + * registers with vfio_device:
> + */
> + ret = vfio_pci_dmabuf_export(vdev, priv, O_CLOEXEC, priv->size, true);
> + if (ret)
> + goto err_free_phys;
> +
> + /*
> + * The VMA gets the DMABUF file so that other users can locate
> + * the DMABUF via a VA. Ownership of the original VFIO device
> + * file being mmap()ed transfers to priv, and is put when the
> + * DMABUF is released.
> + */
> + priv->vfile = vma->vm_file;
> + vma->vm_file = priv->dmabuf->file;
AIUI, this affects what the user sees in /proc/<pid>/maps, right?
Previously a memory range could be clearly associated with a specific
vfio device, now, only for vfio-pci devices, I think the range is
associated to a nondescript dmabuf. If so, is that an acceptable, user
visible, debugging friendly change (ex. lsof)? Thanks,
Alex
> + vma->vm_private_data = priv;
> +
> + return 0;
> +
> +err_free_phys:
> + kfree(priv->phys_vec);
> +err_free_priv:
> + kfree(priv);
> + return ret;
> +}
> +
> void vfio_pci_dma_buf_move(struct vfio_pci_core_device *vdev, bool revoked)
> {
> struct vfio_pci_dma_buf *priv;
> diff --git a/drivers/vfio/pci/vfio_pci_priv.h b/drivers/vfio/pci/vfio_pci_priv.h
> index 5cc8c85a2153..5fd3a6e00a0e 100644
> --- a/drivers/vfio/pci/vfio_pci_priv.h
> +++ b/drivers/vfio/pci/vfio_pci_priv.h
> @@ -30,6 +30,7 @@ struct vfio_pci_dma_buf {
> size_t size;
> struct phys_vec *phys_vec;
> struct p2pdma_provider *provider;
> + struct file *vfile;
> u32 nr_ranges;
> struct kref kref;
> struct completion comp;
> @@ -128,6 +129,9 @@ int vfio_pci_dma_buf_find_pfn(struct vfio_pci_dma_buf *vpdmabuf,
> unsigned long address,
> unsigned int order,
> unsigned long *out_pfn);
> +int vfio_pci_core_mmap_prep_dmabuf(struct vfio_pci_core_device *vdev,
> + struct vm_area_struct *vma,
> + u64 phys_start, u64 pgoff, u64 req_len);
>
> #ifdef CONFIG_VFIO_PCI_DMABUF
> int vfio_pci_core_feature_dma_buf(struct vfio_pci_core_device *vdev, u32 flags,
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-03-18 20:04 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 17+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-03-12 18:45 [RFC v2 PATCH 00/10] vfio/pci: Add mmap() for DMABUFs Matt Evans
2026-03-12 18:45 ` [RFC v2 PATCH 01/10] vfio/pci: Set up VFIO barmap before creating a DMABUF Matt Evans
2026-03-12 18:46 ` [RFC v2 PATCH 02/10] vfio/pci: Clean up DMABUFs before disabling function Matt Evans
2026-03-12 18:46 ` [RFC v2 PATCH 03/10] vfio/pci: Add helper to look up PFNs for DMABUFs Matt Evans
2026-03-12 18:46 ` [RFC v2 PATCH 04/10] vfio/pci: Add a helper to create a DMABUF for a BAR-map VMA Matt Evans
2026-03-18 20:04 ` Alex Williamson [this message]
2026-03-23 13:25 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2026-03-23 14:55 ` Matt Evans
2026-03-12 18:46 ` [RFC v2 PATCH 05/10] vfio/pci: Convert BAR mmap() to use a DMABUF Matt Evans
2026-03-12 18:46 ` [RFC v2 PATCH 06/10] vfio/pci: Remove vfio_pci_zap_bars() Matt Evans
2026-03-13 9:12 ` Christian König
2026-03-12 18:46 ` [RFC v2 PATCH 07/10] vfio/pci: Support mmap() of a VFIO DMABUF Matt Evans
2026-03-12 18:46 ` [RFC v2 PATCH 08/10] vfio/pci: Permanently revoke a DMABUF on request Matt Evans
2026-03-12 18:46 ` [RFC v2 PATCH 09/10] vfio/pci: Add mmap() attributes to DMABUF feature Matt Evans
2026-03-12 18:46 ` [RFC v2 PATCH 10/10] [RFC ONLY] selftests: vfio: Add standalone vfio_dmabuf_mmap_test Matt Evans
2026-03-13 9:21 ` [RFC v2 PATCH 00/10] vfio/pci: Add mmap() for DMABUFs Christian König
2026-03-13 13:28 ` Matt Evans
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=20260318140408.4677fff5@shazbot.org \
--to=alex@shazbot.org \
--cc=amastro@fb.com \
--cc=ankita@nvidia.com \
--cc=apopple@nvidia.com \
--cc=bjorn@kernel.org \
--cc=christian.koenig@amd.com \
--cc=dmatlack@google.com \
--cc=dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org \
--cc=jgg@nvidia.com \
--cc=kevin.tian@intel.com \
--cc=kvm@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=leon@kernel.org \
--cc=linaro-mm-sig@lists.linaro.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-media@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mattev@meta.com \
--cc=mngyadam@amazon.de \
--cc=praan@google.com \
--cc=sumit.semwal@linaro.org \
--cc=vivek.kasireddy@intel.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