search for: lockdep_assert_held

...gt; + * 0 on success, or > + * a negative error code otherwise. > + */ > +int drm_gem_vram_pin_reserved(struct drm_gem_vram_object *gbo, > + unsigned long pl_flag) > +{ > + int i, ret; > + struct ttm_operation_ctx ctx = { false, false }; I think would be good to have a lockdep_assert_held here for the ww_mutex. Also general thing: _reserved is kinda ttm lingo, for dma-buf reservations we call the structure tracking the fences+lock the "reservation", but the naming scheme used is _lock/_unlock. I think would be good to be consistent with that, and use _locked here. Especi...

...gt; + * 0 on success, or > + * a negative error code otherwise. > + */ > +int drm_gem_vram_pin_reserved(struct drm_gem_vram_object *gbo, > + unsigned long pl_flag) > +{ > + int i, ret; > + struct ttm_operation_ctx ctx = { false, false }; I think would be good to have a lockdep_assert_held here for the ww_mutex. Also general thing: _reserved is kinda ttm lingo, for dma-buf reservations we call the structure tracking the fences+lock the "reservation", but the naming scheme used is _lock/_unlock. I think would be good to be consistent with that, and use _locked here. Especi...

...(struct hmm_range *range, unsigned int flags) const unsigned long device_vma = VM_IO | VM_PFNMAP | VM_MIXEDMAP; unsigned long start = range->start, end; struct hmm_vma_walk hmm_vma_walk; - struct hmm *hmm = range->hmm; + struct mm_struct *mm; struct vm_area_struct *vma; int ret; - lockdep_assert_held(&hmm->mmu_notifier.mm->mmap_sem); + if (range->notifier) + mm = range->notifier->mm; + else + mm = range->hmm->mmu_notifier.mm; + + lockdep_assert_held(&mm->mmap_sem); do { /* If range is no longer valid force retry. */ - if (!range->valid) + if (needs_...

Here is change log from V3 To V4: - Fixing spelling/grammar mistakes suggested by Randy Dunlap - Changing the hypercall interface to be able to process multiple pages per one hypercall also suggested by Randy Dunlap. It turns out that this will save lots of vmexist/memory slot flushes when protecting many pages. [PATCH RFC V4 1/3] KVM: X86: Memory ROE documentation [PATCH RFC V4 2/3] KVM:

...kvm->slots_lock otherwise tlb flush would be missed. */ @@ -5301,7 +5351,7 @@ void kvm_mmu_slot_largepage_remove_write_access(struct kvm *kvm, false, NULL); spin_unlock(&kvm->mmu_lock); - /* see kvm_mmu_slot_remove_write_access */ + /* see kvm_mmu_slot_apply_write_access*/ lockdep_assert_held(&kvm->slots_lock); if (flush) diff --git a/arch/x86/kvm/x86.c b/arch/x86/kvm/x86.c index 0046aa70205a..9addc46d75be 100644 --- a/arch/x86/kvm/x86.c +++ b/arch/x86/kvm/x86.c @@ -4177,7 +4177,7 @@ int kvm_vm_ioctl_get_dirty_log(struct kvm *kvm, struct kvm_dirty_log *log) /* * All th...

Hi, > I think would be good to have a lockdep_assert_held here for the ww_mutex. > > Also general thing: _reserved is kinda ttm lingo, for dma-buf reservations > we call the structure tracking the fences+lock the "reservation", but the > naming scheme used is _lock/_unlock. > > I think would be good to be consistent with that...

On Tue, Apr 07, 2020 at 10:03:12PM -0700, Ankur Arora wrote: > +static int __maybe_unused text_poke_late(patch_worker_t worker, void *stage) > +{ > + int ret; > + > + lockdep_assert_held(&text_mutex); > + > + if (system_state != SYSTEM_RUNNING) > + return -EINVAL; > + > + text_poke_state.stage = stage; > + text_poke_state.num_acks = cpumask_weight(cpu_online_mask); > + text_poke_state.head = &alt_modules; > + > + text_poke_state.patch_worker = wo...

...4525a 100644 --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/nouveau_bo.c +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/nouveau_bo.c @@ -1431,6 +1431,8 @@ nouveau_bo_fence(struct nouveau_bo *nvbo, struct nouveau_fence *fence) struct nouveau_fence *new_fence = nouveau_fence_ref(fence); struct nouveau_fence *old_fence = NULL; + lockdep_assert_held(&nvbo->bo.resv->lock.base); + spin_lock(&nvbo->bo.bdev->fence_lock); old_fence = nvbo->bo.sync_obj; nvbo->bo.sync_obj = new_fence; diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/nouveau_display.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/nouveau_display.c index da764a4ed958..61b8c3375135 1006...

...ret = ttm_bo_wait(bo, false, false, true); + WARN_ON(ret); + } + spin_unlock(&bdev->fence_lock); if (ret || unlikely(list_empty(&bo->ddestroy))) { __ttm_bo_unreserve(bo); @@ -1539,6 +1536,8 @@ int ttm_bo_wait(struct ttm_buffer_object *bo, void *sync_obj; int ret = 0; + lockdep_assert_held(&bo->resv->lock.base); + if (likely(bo->sync_obj == NULL)) return 0;

...kvm->slots_lock otherwise tlb flush would be missed. */ @@ -5301,7 +5351,7 @@ void kvm_mmu_slot_largepage_remove_write_access(struct kvm *kvm, false, NULL); spin_unlock(&kvm->mmu_lock); - /* see kvm_mmu_slot_remove_write_access */ + /* see kvm_mmu_slot_apply_write_access*/ lockdep_assert_held(&kvm->slots_lock); if (flush) diff --git a/arch/x86/kvm/x86.c b/arch/x86/kvm/x86.c index 2b812b3c5088..de58ddaf5260 100644 --- a/arch/x86/kvm/x86.c +++ b/arch/x86/kvm/x86.c @@ -4179,7 +4179,7 @@ int kvm_vm_ioctl_get_dirty_log(struct kvm *kvm, struct kvm_dirty_log *log) /* * All th...

...gt; + */ >>> +int drm_gem_vram_pin_reserved(struct drm_gem_vram_object *gbo, >>> + unsigned long pl_flag) >>> +{ >>> + int i, ret; >>> + struct ttm_operation_ctx ctx = { false, false }; >> I think would be good to have a lockdep_assert_held here for the ww_mutex. >> >> Also general thing: _reserved is kinda ttm lingo, for dma-buf reservations >> we call the structure tracking the fences+lock the "reservation", but the >> naming scheme used is _lock/_unlock. >> >> I think would be good to b...

Hi, This is my first set of patches that works as I would expect, and the third revision I sent to mailing lists. Following up with my previous discussions about kernel rootkit mitigation via placing R/O protection on critical data structure, static data, privileged registers with static content. These patches present the first part where it is only possible to place these protections on memory

Hi, This is my first set of patches that works as I would expect, and the third revision I sent to mailing lists. Following up with my previous discussions about kernel rootkit mitigation via placing R/O protection on critical data structure, static data, privileged registers with static content. These patches present the first part where it is only possible to place these protections on memory

Not holding the mutex potentially causes corruption of the kernel channel when page flipping. Cc: stable at vger.kernel.org #3.13 Signed-off-by: Maarten Lankhorst <maarten.lankhorst at canonical.com> --- diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/nouveau_display.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/nouveau_display.c index 29c3efdfc7dd..76e3cf025c10 100644 --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/nouveau_display.c

...unsigned long start = range->start, end; - struct hmm_vma_walk hmm_vma_walk; + unsigned long start = range->start; + struct hmm_vma_walk hmm_vma_walk = {}; struct hmm *hmm = range->hmm; - struct vm_area_struct *vma; - struct mm_walk mm_walk; + struct mm_walk mm_walk = {}; int ret; lockdep_assert_held(&hmm->mm->mmap_sem); - do { - /* If range is no longer valid force retry. */ - if (!range->valid) - return -EBUSY; + hmm_vma_walk.range = range; + hmm_vma_walk.last = start; + hmm_vma_walk.flags = flags; + mm_walk.private = &hmm_vma_walk; - vma = find_vma(hmm->mm, start...

...nsigned long start = range->start, end; - struct hmm_vma_walk hmm_vma_walk; + unsigned long start = range->start; + struct hmm_vma_walk hmm_vma_walk = { + .range = range, + .last = start, + .flags = flags, + }; struct hmm *hmm = range->hmm; - struct vm_area_struct *vma; int ret; lockdep_assert_held(&hmm->mmu_notifier.mm->mmap_sem); do { - /* If range is no longer valid force retry. */ - if (!range->valid) - return -EBUSY; - - vma = find_vma(hmm->mmu_notifier.mm, start); - if (vma == NULL || (vma->vm_flags & device_vma)) - return -EFAULT; - - if (!(vma->v...

...x_write_cache_enabled(struct dax_device *dax_dev) } EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(dax_write_cache_enabled); +bool dax_synchronous(struct dax_device *dax_dev) +{ + return test_bit(DAXDEV_SYNC, &dax_dev->flags); +} +EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(dax_synchronous); + bool dax_alive(struct dax_device *dax_dev) { lockdep_assert_held(&dax_srcu); @@ -511,7 +519,7 @@ static void dax_add_host(struct dax_device *dax_dev, const char *host) } struct dax_device *alloc_dax(void *private, const char *__host, - const struct dax_operations *ops) + const struct dax_operations *ops, bool sync) { struct dax_device *dax_dev; co...

...x_write_cache_enabled(struct dax_device *dax_dev) } EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(dax_write_cache_enabled); +bool dax_synchronous(struct dax_device *dax_dev) +{ + return test_bit(DAXDEV_SYNC, &dax_dev->flags); +} +EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(dax_synchronous); + bool dax_alive(struct dax_device *dax_dev) { lockdep_assert_held(&dax_srcu); @@ -511,7 +519,7 @@ static void dax_add_host(struct dax_device *dax_dev, const char *host) } struct dax_device *alloc_dax(void *private, const char *__host, - const struct dax_operations *ops) + const struct dax_operations *ops, bool sync) { struct dax_device *dax_dev; co...

...x_write_cache_enabled(struct dax_device *dax_dev) } EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(dax_write_cache_enabled); +bool dax_synchronous(struct dax_device *dax_dev) +{ + return test_bit(DAXDEV_SYNC, &dax_dev->flags); +} +EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(dax_synchronous); + bool dax_alive(struct dax_device *dax_dev) { lockdep_assert_held(&dax_srcu); @@ -508,7 +516,7 @@ static void dax_add_host(struct dax_device *dax_dev, const char *host) } struct dax_device *alloc_dax(void *private, const char *__host, - const struct dax_operations *ops) + const struct dax_operations *ops, unsigned long flags) { struct dax_device *dax...

...understand. > If you change tools/testing/selftests/vm/hmm-tests.c line 868 to > ASSERT_EQ(ret, -1); > Then the test will abort, core dump, and cause two problems, > 1) the migrated page will be faulted back to system memory in order to write > it to the core dump. This triggers lockdep_assert_held(&walk.mm->mmap_sem) > in walk_page_range(). Has the migration stuff become entangled with the xarray? > [ 137.980718] Code: 80 2f 1a 83 c6 05 e9 8d 7b 01 01 e8 3e b1 b1 fe e9 05 ff ff ff 66 66 2e 0f 1f 84 00 00 00 00 00 0f 1f 00 41 56 41 55 41 54 55 <48> 89 fd 53 4c 8d 6d 1...