[PATCH V1 1/1] iommu: Make sure device's ID array elements are unique
Tomasz Nowicki
tn at semihalf.com
Wed Dec 20 02:28:29 PST 2017
On 19.12.2017 17:37, Alex Williamson wrote:
> On Tue, 19 Dec 2017 16:20:21 +0100
> Tomasz Nowicki <tomasz.nowicki at caviumnetworks.com> wrote:
>
>> While iterating over DMA aliases for a PCI device, for some rare cases
>> (i.e. PCIe-to-PCI/X bridges) we may get exactly the same ID as initial child
>> device. In turn, the same ID may get registered for a device multiple times.
>> Eventually IOMMU driver may try to configure the same ID within domain
>> multiple times too which for some IOMMU drivers is illegal and causes kernel
>> panic.
>>
>> Rule out ID duplication prior to device ID array registration.
>>
>> CC: stable at vger.kernel.org # v4.14+
>
> You've identified a release, is there a specific commit this fixes?
Yes, it was triggered by converting drm_pci_init() to
pci_register_driver() in ast_drv.c
Fixes: 10631d724def ("drm/pci: Deprecate drm_pci_init/exit completely
")
>
>> Signed-off-by: Tomasz Nowicki <tomasz.nowicki at caviumnetworks.com>
>> ---
>> drivers/iommu/iommu.c | 28 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>> 1 file changed, 28 insertions(+)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/iommu/iommu.c b/drivers/iommu/iommu.c
>> index 3de5c0b..9b2c138 100644
>> --- a/drivers/iommu/iommu.c
>> +++ b/drivers/iommu/iommu.c
>> @@ -1945,6 +1945,31 @@ void iommu_fwspec_free(struct device *dev)
>> }
>> EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(iommu_fwspec_free);
>>
>> +static void iommu_fwspec_remove_ids_dup(struct device *dev, u32 *ids,
>> + int *num_ids)
>> +{
>> + struct iommu_fwspec *fwspec = dev->iommu_fwspec;
>> + int i, j, k, valid_ids = *num_ids;
>> +
>> + for (i = 0; i < valid_ids; i++) {
>> + for (j = 0; j < fwspec->num_ids; j++) {
>> + if (ids[i] != fwspec->ids[j])
>> + continue;
>> +
>> + dev_info(dev, "found 0x%x ID duplication, skipped\n",
>> + ids[i]);
>> +
>> + for (k = i + 1; k < valid_ids; k++)
>> + ids[k - 1] = ids[k];
>
> Use memmove()?
Right.
>
>> +
>> + valid_ids--;
>> + break;
>
> At this point ids[i] is not the ids[i] that we tested for dupes, it's
> what was ids[i + 1], but we're going to i++ on the next iteration and
> we therefore never test that entry.
Good point.
Now the fundamental question is where we should put the patch, here or
in SMMUv3 driver as per Robin suggestion.
Thanks,
Tomasz
More information about the linux-arm-kernel
mailing list