Re: [PATCH v4 11/13] iommu/arm-smmu-v3: Improve add_device() error handling
From: Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>
Date: 2020-01-14 15:25:48
Also in:
linux-acpi, linux-arm-kernel, linux-iommu, linux-pci
Subsystem:
iommu subsystem, the rest · Maintainers:
Joerg Roedel, Will Deacon, Linus Torvalds
On Thu, Dec 19, 2019 at 05:30:31PM +0100, Jean-Philippe Brucker wrote:
Let add_device() clean up after itself. The iommu_bus_init() function does call remove_device() on error, but other sites (e.g. of_iommu) do not. Don't free level-2 stream tables because we'd have to track if we allocated each of them or if they are used by other endpoints. It's not worth the hassle since they are managed resources. Reviewed-by: Eric Auger <eric.auger@redhat.com> Reviewed-by: Jonathan Cameron <Jonathan.Cameron@huawei.com> Signed-off-by: Jean-Philippe Brucker <redacted> --- drivers/iommu/arm-smmu-v3.c | 28 +++++++++++++++++++++------- 1 file changed, 21 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)
I think this is alright, with one caveat relating to:
/*
* We _can_ actually withstand dodgy bus code re-calling add_device()
* without an intervening remove_device()/of_xlate() sequence, but
* we're not going to do so quietly...
*/
if (WARN_ON_ONCE(fwspec->iommu_priv)) {
master = fwspec->iommu_priv;
smmu = master->smmu;
} ...
which may be on shakey ground if the subsequent add_device() call can fail
and free stuff that the first one allocated. At least, I don't know what
we're trying to support with this, so it's hard to tell whether or not it
still works as intended after your change.
How is this supposed to work? I don't recall ever seeing that WARN fire,
so can we just remove this and bail instead? Robin?
Something like below before your changes...
Will
--->8
diff --git a/drivers/iommu/arm-smmu-v3.c b/drivers/iommu/arm-smmu-v3.c
index effe72eb89e7..6ae3df2f3495 100644
--- a/drivers/iommu/arm-smmu-v3.c
+++ b/drivers/iommu/arm-smmu-v3.c@@ -2534,28 +2534,23 @@ static int arm_smmu_add_device(struct device *dev) if (!fwspec || fwspec->ops != &arm_smmu_ops) return -ENODEV; - /* - * We _can_ actually withstand dodgy bus code re-calling add_device() - * without an intervening remove_device()/of_xlate() sequence, but - * we're not going to do so quietly... - */ - if (WARN_ON_ONCE(fwspec->iommu_priv)) { - master = fwspec->iommu_priv; - smmu = master->smmu; - } else { - smmu = arm_smmu_get_by_fwnode(fwspec->iommu_fwnode); - if (!smmu) - return -ENODEV; - master = kzalloc(sizeof(*master), GFP_KERNEL); - if (!master) - return -ENOMEM; - master->dev = dev; - master->smmu = smmu; - master->sids = fwspec->ids; - master->num_sids = fwspec->num_ids; - fwspec->iommu_priv = master; - } + if (WARN_ON_ONCE(fwspec->iommu_priv)) + return -EBUSY; + + smmu = arm_smmu_get_by_fwnode(fwspec->iommu_fwnode); + if (!smmu) + return -ENODEV; + + master = kzalloc(sizeof(*master), GFP_KERNEL); + if (!master) + return -ENOMEM; + + master->dev = dev; + master->smmu = smmu; + master->sids = fwspec->ids; + master->num_sids = fwspec->num_ids; + fwspec->iommu_priv = master; /* Check the SIDs are in range of the SMMU and our stream table */ for (i = 0; i < master->num_sids; i++) {