From: Alex Williamson <alex@shazbot.org>
To: Matt Evans <mattev@meta.com>
Cc: Bjorn Helgaas <bhelgaas@google.com>,
Logan Gunthorpe <logang@deltatee.com>,
Ankit Agrawal <ankita@nvidia.com>,
Leon Romanovsky <leon@kernel.org>,
Niklas Schnelle <schnelle@linux.ibm.com>,
<linux-pci@vger.kernel.org>, <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
alex@shazbot.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] PCI/P2PDMA: Avoid returning a provider for non_mappable_bars
Date: Wed, 22 Apr 2026 09:01:46 -0600 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20260422090146.6faf00f8@shazbot.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20260421174351.3897842-1-mattev@meta.com>
On Tue, 21 Apr 2026 10:43:51 -0700
Matt Evans <mattev@meta.com> wrote:
> Extend pcim_p2pdma_provider()'s checks to exclude functions that have
> pdev->non_mappable_bars set.
>
> Consumers such as VFIO were previously able to map these for access by
> the CPU or P2P. Update the comment on non_mappable_bars to show it
> refers to any access, not just userspace CPU access.
>
> Fixes: 372d6d1b8ae3c ("PCI/P2PDMA: Refactor to separate core P2P functionality from memory allocation")
> Signed-off-by: Matt Evans <mattev@meta.com>
> ---
>
> This arises from Alex Williamson's suggestion to test
> non_mappable_bars when getting the provider, with discussion here:
>
> https://lore.kernel.org/kvm/20260415181623.1021090-1-mattev@meta.com/
>
> The goal was to prevent a hole where VFIO could export DMABUFs for
> BARs marked non-mappable, and to fix for all users of the provider
> rather than just VFIO. Alex observed that non_mappable_bars should be
> taken to mean BARs weren't usable by the CPU _or_ peers and,
> considering that, its comment about userspace access wasn't quite
> right.
>
>
> drivers/pci/p2pdma.c | 3 ++-
> include/linux/pci.h | 2 +-
> 2 files changed, 3 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/pci/p2pdma.c b/drivers/pci/p2pdma.c
> index 7c898542af8d..4a783413f466 100644
> --- a/drivers/pci/p2pdma.c
> +++ b/drivers/pci/p2pdma.c
> @@ -318,7 +318,8 @@ struct p2pdma_provider *pcim_p2pdma_provider(struct pci_dev *pdev, int bar)
> {
> struct pci_p2pdma *p2p;
>
> - if (!(pci_resource_flags(pdev, bar) & IORESOURCE_MEM))
> + if (!(pci_resource_flags(pdev, bar) & IORESOURCE_MEM) ||
> + pdev->non_mappable_bars)
> return NULL;
>
> p2p = rcu_dereference_protected(pdev->p2pdma, 1);
> diff --git a/include/linux/pci.h b/include/linux/pci.h
> index 2c4454583c11..1e6802017d6b 100644
> --- a/include/linux/pci.h
> +++ b/include/linux/pci.h
> @@ -508,7 +508,7 @@ struct pci_dev {
> unsigned int no_command_memory:1; /* No PCI_COMMAND_MEMORY */
> unsigned int rom_bar_overlap:1; /* ROM BAR disable broken */
> unsigned int rom_attr_enabled:1; /* Display of ROM attribute enabled? */
> - unsigned int non_mappable_bars:1; /* BARs can't be mapped to user-space */
> + unsigned int non_mappable_bars:1; /* BARs can't be mapped by CPU or peers */
> pci_dev_flags_t dev_flags;
> atomic_t enable_cnt; /* pci_enable_device has been called */
>
Should pcim_p2pdma_init() separately test pdev->non_mappable_bars
before the rcu-deref/kzalloc of the pci_p2pdma object and return
-EOPNOTSUPP?
That then invokes the same error paths we'd see if we simply don't have
p2pdma in the kernel and handles the pci_p2pdma_add_resource() path
automatically as well.
This pcim_p2pdma_provider() test is really then just suppressing the
WARN_ON that we'd otherwise see by not finding the p2p object on the
device. Thanks,
Alex
prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-04-22 15:01 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-04-21 17:43 [PATCH] PCI/P2PDMA: Avoid returning a provider for non_mappable_bars Matt Evans
2026-04-21 18:14 ` Logan Gunthorpe
2026-04-21 19:49 ` Leon Romanovsky
2026-04-22 14:22 ` Matt Evans
2026-04-22 15:19 ` Leon Romanovsky
2026-04-22 9:19 ` Niklas Schnelle
2026-04-22 15:01 ` Alex Williamson [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=20260422090146.6faf00f8@shazbot.org \
--to=alex@shazbot.org \
--cc=ankita@nvidia.com \
--cc=bhelgaas@google.com \
--cc=leon@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-pci@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=logang@deltatee.com \
--cc=mattev@meta.com \
--cc=schnelle@linux.ibm.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