From: Robin Murphy <robin.murphy@arm.com>
To: Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@ziepe.ca>
Cc: Tal Zussman <tz2294@columbia.edu>,
Kevin Tian <kevin.tian@intel.com>,
"Joerg Roedel (AMD)" <joro@8bytes.org>,
Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>,
Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>,
Jean-Philippe Brucker <jpb@kernel.org>,
iommu@lists.linux.dev, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] iommu: free dev->iommu when iommu_fwspec_init() cannot allocate the fwspec
Date: Tue, 3 Nov 2026 20:18:40 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <9c64eeb4-66cb-4e82-a00d-ae5ef5cba360@arm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20261103193253.GN3889730@ziepe.ca>
On 2026-11-03 7:32 pm, Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 02, 2026 at 04:51:05PM +0000, Robin Murphy wrote:
>> On 31/10/2026 8:33 pm, Tal Zussman wrote:
>>> iommu_fwspec_init() allocates dev->iommu with dev_iommu_get() and then
>>> the fwspec. If the fwspec allocation fails it returns -ENOMEM but leaves
>>> dev->iommu allocated, and it leaks.
>>>
>>> kmemleak reports it when iommufd_fail_nth injects the allocation
>>> failure:
>>>
>>> unreferenced object 0xffff88811c138b00 (size 192):
>>> comm "iommufd_fail_nt", pid 783
>>> backtrace:
>>> __kmalloc_cache_noprof
>>> dev_iommu_get
>>> iommu_fwspec_init
>>> iommu_mock_device_add
>>> iommufd_test
>>> iommufd_fops_ioctl
>>>
>>> Free dev->iommu on failure if this call allocated it. iommu_init_device()
>>> allocates it before calling into the driver and frees it on its own
>>> error path, so leave it alone in that case.
>>>
>>> Fixes: 72acd9df18f1 ("iommu: Move iommu_fwspec to struct dev_iommu")
>>
>> No, the bug is clearly the early return in 2a918911ed3d ("iommufd: Register
>> iommufd mock devices with fwspec"), so fix it there please.
>> iommu_fwspec_init() has always been designed to be called in conjunction
>> with iommu_probe_device() which handles cleanup appropriately.
>
> Asking AI to audit this found the other case I remember...
>
> Yes: ACPI DMA configuration during driver binding can leave dev->iommu
> allocated after failure:
>
> really_probe()
> -> dev->bus->dma_configure()
> -> acpi_dma_configure_id()
> -> acpi_iommu_configure_id()
> -> IORT / RIMT / VIOT
> -> acpi_iommu_fwspec_init()
> -> iommu_fwspec_init()
>
> If dev_iommu_get() allocates successfully and the subsequent fwspec
> allocation fails, acpi_iommu_configure_id() (line 1614) does no
> cleanup. acpi_dma_configure_id() (line 1670) ignores errors other than
> -EPROBE_DEFER. This invocation has no enclosing iommu_init_device() to
> unwind it.
Yes, because that path will no longer allocate - if we reach
iommu_fwspec_init() from the really_probe path at all now it's because
the IOMMU is not yet registered, thus we'll always take the early return.
In fact I think the only reason to still have dev_iommu_get() in
iommu_fwspec_init(), rather than just dereferencing dev->iommu directly,
is for the sake of those few remaining drivers which abuse
of_dma_configure() directly that I'm not sure what to do about.
Thanks,
Robin.
> The OF path has its own manual free fix already, it doesn't rely on
> iommu_probe_device() to clean it. The other driver users are the only
> things actually protected by ops->probe_device().
>
>>> @@ -3074,6 +3074,7 @@ int iommu_fwspec_init(struct device *dev, struct fwnode_handle *iommu_fwnode)
>>> {
>>> const struct iommu_device *iommu = iommu_from_fwnode(iommu_fwnode);
>>> struct iommu_fwspec *fwspec = dev_iommu_fwspec_get(dev);
>>> + bool new_iommu = !dev->iommu;
>>> if (!iommu)
>>> return driver_deferred_probe_check_state(dev);
>>> @@ -3088,8 +3089,11 @@ int iommu_fwspec_init(struct device *dev, struct fwnode_handle *iommu_fwnode)
>>> /* Preallocate for the overwhelmingly common case of 1 ID */
>>> fwspec = kzalloc_flex(*fwspec, ids, 1);
>>> - if (!fwspec)
>>> + if (!fwspec) {
>>> + if (new_iommu)
>>> + dev_iommu_free(dev);
>>> return -ENOMEM;
>>> + }
>
> Just move this allocation before the dev_iommu_get() and free it if
> the get fails. Then the function has a more sensible calling
> convention that error means it doesn't need any unwinding. The
> new_iommu is a little too weird.
>
> Jason
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-11-03 20:18 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-10-31 20:33 [PATCH 0/2] iommufd: remove the last use of set_page_dirty_lock() Tal Zussman
2026-10-31 20:33 ` [PATCH 1/2] iommu: free dev->iommu when iommu_fwspec_init() cannot allocate the fwspec Tal Zussman
2026-11-02 16:51 ` Robin Murphy
2026-11-03 12:30 ` Tal Zussman
2026-11-03 19:32 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2026-11-03 20:18 ` Robin Murphy [this message]
2026-10-31 20:33 ` [PATCH 2/2] iommufd: copy to and from folios in batch_rw() Tal Zussman
2026-11-03 19:36 ` Jason Gunthorpe
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=9c64eeb4-66cb-4e82-a00d-ae5ef5cba360@arm.com \
--to=robin.murphy@arm.com \
--cc=gregkh@linuxfoundation.org \
--cc=iommu@lists.linux.dev \
--cc=jgg@ziepe.ca \
--cc=joro@8bytes.org \
--cc=jpb@kernel.org \
--cc=kevin.tian@intel.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=tz2294@columbia.edu \
--cc=will@kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox
all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®