[ARM IOMMU] IOMMU framework concurrency issue
Jason Gunthorpe
jgg at ziepe.ca
Wed Oct 18 09:19:18 PDT 2023
On Wed, Oct 18, 2023 at 04:34:20PM +0100, Robin Murphy wrote:
> On 2023-10-17 17:33, Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
> >
> > eg make sure the iommu driver is fully registered before allowing any
> > concurrent probes. Once the iommu driver is registered it will be able
> > to catch the bus notifiers and serialize things properly.
>
> Ugh, I think I see at least how this happens for device which *don't* have
> an IOMMU - because iommu_init_device() has to transiently allocate
> dev->iommu in order to call ops->probe_device in order to discover
> that the
Hmm! Is it essential though? That ordering was C&P from before, I
didn't study it closely when I copied it..
I only checked some drivers, but something like this looked like it
could resolve the situation you described - Zhenhua is that your
situation, a non-probed device?
diff --git a/drivers/iommu/iommu.c b/drivers/iommu/iommu.c
index 47172f1084d8fd..580e74afdb0765 100644
--- a/drivers/iommu/iommu.c
+++ b/drivers/iommu/iommu.c
@@ -386,6 +386,16 @@ static u32 dev_iommu_get_max_pasids(struct device *dev)
return min_t(u32, max_pasids, dev->iommu->iommu_dev->max_pasids);
}
+void dev_iommu_priv_set(struct device *dev, void *priv)
+{
+ struct dev_iommu *dev_iommu;
+
+ dev_iommu = dev_iommu_get(dev);
+ if (WARN_ON(!dev_iommu))
+ return; // FIXME handle failure in drivers
+ dev->iommu->priv = priv;
+}
+
/*
* Init the dev->iommu and dev->iommu_group in the struct device and get the
* driver probed
@@ -393,12 +403,10 @@ static u32 dev_iommu_get_max_pasids(struct device *dev)
static int iommu_init_device(struct device *dev, const struct iommu_ops *ops)
{
struct iommu_device *iommu_dev;
+ struct dev_iommu *dev_iommu;
struct iommu_group *group;
int ret;
- if (!dev_iommu_get(dev))
- return -ENOMEM;
-
if (!try_module_get(ops->owner)) {
ret = -EINVAL;
goto err_free;
@@ -409,7 +417,14 @@ static int iommu_init_device(struct device *dev, const struct iommu_ops *ops)
ret = PTR_ERR(iommu_dev);
goto err_module_put;
}
- dev->iommu->iommu_dev = iommu_dev;
+
+ dev_iommu = dev_iommu_get(dev);
+ if (WARN_ON(!dev_iommu)) {
+ ret = -ENOMEM;
+ goto err_release;
+ }
+
+ dev_iommu->iommu_dev = iommu_dev;
ret = iommu_device_link(iommu_dev, dev);
if (ret)
@@ -424,9 +439,9 @@ static int iommu_init_device(struct device *dev, const struct iommu_ops *ops)
}
dev->iommu_group = group;
- dev->iommu->max_pasids = dev_iommu_get_max_pasids(dev);
+ dev_iommu->max_pasids = dev_iommu_get_max_pasids(dev);
if (ops->is_attach_deferred)
- dev->iommu->attach_deferred = ops->is_attach_deferred(dev);
+ dev_iommu->attach_deferred = ops->is_attach_deferred(dev);
return 0;
err_unlink:
@@ -438,7 +453,11 @@ static int iommu_init_device(struct device *dev, const struct iommu_ops *ops)
module_put(ops->owner);
err_free:
dev->iommu->iommu_dev = NULL;
- dev_iommu_free(dev);
+ /*
+ * If probe_device allocated a dev->iommu and things failed later
+ * we just leave it. We don't yet have robust locking, there
+ * could be concurrent users.
+ */
return ret;
}
diff --git a/include/linux/iommu.h b/include/linux/iommu.h
index 68c9be9293e4c0..5c25c378a13ece 100644
--- a/include/linux/iommu.h
+++ b/include/linux/iommu.h
@@ -713,10 +713,7 @@ static inline void *dev_iommu_priv_get(struct device *dev)
return NULL;
}
-static inline void dev_iommu_priv_set(struct device *dev, void *priv)
-{
- dev->iommu->priv = priv;
-}
+void dev_iommu_priv_set(struct device *dev, void *priv);
int iommu_probe_device(struct device *dev);
More information about the linux-arm-kernel
mailing list