Thread (35 messages) 35 messages, 5 authors, 2021-08-10

Re: [RFC v1 7/8] mshv: implement in-kernel device framework

From: Praveen Kumar <hidden>
Date: 2021-08-03 19:12:34
Also in: linux-doc, lkml

On 09-07-2021 17:13, Wei Liu wrote:
quoted hunk ↗ jump to hunk
This is basically the same code adopted from KVM. The main user case is
the future MSHV-VFIO bridge device. We don't have any plan to support
in-kernel device emulation yet, but it wouldn't hurt to make the code
more flexible.

Signed-off-by: Wei Liu <wei.liu@kernel.org>
---
 Documentation/virt/mshv/api.rst |  12 +++
 drivers/hv/mshv_main.c          | 181 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
 include/linux/mshv.h            |  57 ++++++++++
 include/uapi/linux/mshv.h       |  36 +++++++
 4 files changed, 286 insertions(+)
diff --git a/Documentation/virt/mshv/api.rst b/Documentation/virt/mshv/api.rst
index 56a6edfcfe29..7d35dd589831 100644
--- a/Documentation/virt/mshv/api.rst
+++ b/Documentation/virt/mshv/api.rst
@@ -170,4 +170,16 @@ Can be used to get/set various properties of a partition.
 Some properties can only be set at partition creation. For these, there are
 parameters in MSHV_CREATE_PARTITION.
 
+3.12 MSHV_CREATE_DEVICE
+-----------------------
+:Type: partition ioctl
+:Parameters: struct mshv_create_device
+:Returns: 0 on success
+
+Can be used to create an in-kernel device.
+
+If the MSHV_CREATE_DEVICE_TEST flag is set, only test whether the
+device type is supported (not necessarily whether it can be created
+in the current vm).
 
+Currently only supports VFIO type device.
diff --git a/drivers/hv/mshv_main.c b/drivers/hv/mshv_main.c
index 4cbc520471e4..84c774a561de 100644
--- a/drivers/hv/mshv_main.c
+++ b/drivers/hv/mshv_main.c
@@ -20,6 +20,8 @@
 #include <linux/random.h>
 #include <linux/mshv.h>
 #include <linux/mshv_eventfd.h>
+#include <linux/hyperv.h>
+#include <linux/nospec.h>
 #include <asm/mshyperv.h>
 
 #include "mshv.h"
@@ -33,6 +35,7 @@ static int mshv_vp_release(struct inode *inode, struct file *filp);
 static long mshv_vp_ioctl(struct file *filp, unsigned int ioctl, unsigned long arg);
 static struct mshv_partition *mshv_partition_get(struct mshv_partition *partition);
 static void mshv_partition_put(struct mshv_partition *partition);
+static void mshv_partition_put_no_destroy(struct mshv_partition *partition);
 static int mshv_partition_release(struct inode *inode, struct file *filp);
 static long mshv_partition_ioctl(struct file *filp, unsigned int ioctl, unsigned long arg);
 static int mshv_dev_open(struct inode *inode, struct file *filp);
@@ -912,6 +915,172 @@ mshv_partition_ioctl_set_msi_routing(struct mshv_partition *partition,
 	return ret;
 }
 
+static int mshv_device_ioctl_attr(struct mshv_device *dev,
+				 int (*accessor)(struct mshv_device *dev,
+						 struct mshv_device_attr *attr),
+				 unsigned long arg)
+{
+	struct mshv_device_attr attr;
+
+	if (!accessor)
+		return -EPERM;
+
+	if (copy_from_user(&attr, (void __user *)arg, sizeof(attr)))
+		return -EFAULT;
+
+	return accessor(dev, &attr);
+}
+
+static long mshv_device_ioctl(struct file *filp, unsigned int ioctl,
+			      unsigned long arg)
+{
+	struct mshv_device *dev = filp->private_data;
+
+	switch (ioctl) {
+	case MSHV_SET_DEVICE_ATTR:
+		return mshv_device_ioctl_attr(dev, dev->ops->set_attr, arg);
+	case MSHV_GET_DEVICE_ATTR:
+		return mshv_device_ioctl_attr(dev, dev->ops->get_attr, arg);
+	case MSHV_HAS_DEVICE_ATTR:
+		return mshv_device_ioctl_attr(dev, dev->ops->has_attr, arg);
+	default:
+		if (dev->ops->ioctl)
+			return dev->ops->ioctl(dev, ioctl, arg);
+
+		return -ENOTTY;
+	}
Have seen some static analyzer tool cribbing here of not returning any error.
If you feel OK, please move the 'return -ENOTTY' down after switch block. Thanks.
+}
+
+static int mshv_device_release(struct inode *inode, struct file *filp)
+{
+	struct mshv_device *dev = filp->private_data;
+	struct mshv_partition *partition = dev->partition;
+
+	if (dev->ops->release) {
+		mutex_lock(&partition->mutex);
+		list_del(&dev->partition_node);
+		dev->ops->release(dev);
+		mutex_unlock(&partition->mutex);
+	}
+
+	mshv_partition_put(partition);
+	return 0;
+}
+
+static const struct file_operations mshv_device_fops = {
+	.unlocked_ioctl = mshv_device_ioctl,
+	.release = mshv_device_release,
+};
+
+static const struct mshv_device_ops *mshv_device_ops_table[MSHV_DEV_TYPE_MAX];
+
+int mshv_register_device_ops(const struct mshv_device_ops *ops, u32 type)
+{
+	if (type >= ARRAY_SIZE(mshv_device_ops_table))
+		return -ENOSPC;
+
+	if (mshv_device_ops_table[type] != NULL)
+		return -EEXIST;
+
+	mshv_device_ops_table[type] = ops;
+	return 0;
+}
+
+void mshv_unregister_device_ops(u32 type)
+{
+	if (type >= ARRAY_SIZE(mshv_device_ops_table))
+		return;
+	mshv_device_ops_table[type] = NULL;
+}
+
+static long
+mshv_partition_ioctl_create_device(struct mshv_partition *partition,
+	void __user *user_args)
+{
+	long r;
+	struct mshv_create_device tmp, *cd;
+	struct mshv_device *dev;
+	const struct mshv_device_ops *ops;
+	int type;
+
+	if (copy_from_user(&tmp, user_args, sizeof(tmp))) {
+		r = -EFAULT;
+		goto out;
+	}
+
+	cd = &tmp;
+
+	if (cd->type >= ARRAY_SIZE(mshv_device_ops_table)) {
+		r = -ENODEV;
+		goto out;
+	}
+
+	type = array_index_nospec(cd->type, ARRAY_SIZE(mshv_device_ops_table));
+	ops = mshv_device_ops_table[type];
+	if (ops == NULL) {
+		r = -ENODEV;
+		goto out;
+	}
+
+	if (cd->flags & MSHV_CREATE_DEVICE_TEST) {
+		r = 0;
+		goto out;
+	}
+
+	dev = kzalloc(sizeof(*dev), GFP_KERNEL_ACCOUNT);
+	if (!dev) {
+		r = -ENOMEM;
+		goto out;
+	}
+
+	dev->ops = ops;
+	dev->partition = partition;
+
+	r = ops->create(dev, type);
+	if (r < 0) {
+		kfree(dev);
+		goto out;
+	}
+
+	list_add(&dev->partition_node, &partition->devices);
+
+	if (ops->init)
+		ops->init(dev);
+
+	mshv_partition_get(partition);
+	r = anon_inode_getfd(ops->name, &mshv_device_fops, dev, O_RDWR | O_CLOEXEC);
+	if (r < 0) {
+		mshv_partition_put_no_destroy(partition);
+		list_del(&dev->partition_node);
+		ops->destroy(dev);
I hope ops->destroy will free dev as well ?
+		goto out;
+	}
+
+	cd->fd = r;
+	r = 0;
+
+	if (copy_to_user(user_args, &tmp, sizeof(tmp))) {
+		r = -EFAULT;
I don't think we will be cleaning up anything ? Or do we need to?
+		goto out;
+	}
+out:
+	return r;
+}
+
Regards,

~Praveen.
Keyboard shortcuts
hback out one level
jnext message in thread
kprevious message in thread
ldrill in
Escclose help / fold thread tree
?toggle this help