Re: [PATCH v3 3/4] vfio-pci/zdev: Add VFIO FMB device features

[Alex Williamson]

On Mon,  8 Jun 2026 13:18:49 -0400
Omar Elghoul <oelghoul@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> diff --git a/drivers/vfio/pci/vfio_pci_zdev.c b/drivers/vfio/pci/vfio_pci_zdev.c
> index 0990fdb146b7..09454495ee23 100644
> --- a/drivers/vfio/pci/vfio_pci_zdev.c
> +++ b/drivers/vfio/pci/vfio_pci_zdev.c
> @@ -167,3 +167,60 @@ void vfio_pci_zdev_close_device(struct vfio_pci_core_device *vdev)
>  	if (zpci_kvm_hook.kvm_unregister)
>  		zpci_kvm_hook.kvm_unregister(zdev);
>  }
> +
> +int vfio_pci_zdev_feature_fmb_enable(struct vfio_pci_core_device *vdev, u32 flags,
> +				     void __user *arg, size_t argsz)
> +{
> +	struct zpci_dev *zdev;
> +	struct vfio_device_feature_zpci_fmb_enable fmb_enable;
> +	int ret;
> +
> +	ret = vfio_check_feature(flags, argsz, VFIO_DEVICE_FEATURE_SET, sizeof(fmb_enable));
> +	if (ret != 1)
> +		return ret;
> +
> +	zdev = to_zpci(vdev->pdev);
> +	if (!zdev)
> +		return -ENODEV;
> +
> +	guard(mutex)(&zdev->fmb_lock);
> +
> +	if (copy_from_user(&fmb_enable, arg, sizeof(fmb_enable)))
> +		return -EFAULT;

The guard can drop to here, it doesn't protect anything related to the
copy_from_user().

> +
> +	if (fmb_enable.enabled)
> +		return zpci_fmb_reenable_device(zdev);
> +	return zpci_fmb_disable_device(zdev);
> +}
> +
> +int vfio_pci_zdev_feature_fmb_read(struct vfio_pci_core_device *vdev, u32 flags,
> +				   void __user *arg, size_t argsz)
> +{
> +	struct zpci_dev *zdev;
> +	struct vfio_device_feature_zpci_fmb_read fmb_read;
> +	struct zpci_fmb fmb_temp = {0};

Unnecessary initialization, we only copy to the user what's been
written.

> +	int ret;
> +
> +	ret = vfio_check_feature(flags, argsz, VFIO_DEVICE_FEATURE_GET, sizeof(fmb_read));
> +	if (ret != 1)
> +		return ret;
> +
> +	zdev = to_zpci(vdev->pdev);
> +	if (!zdev)
> +		return -ENODEV;
> +
> +	guard(mutex)(&zdev->fmb_lock);
> +
> +	if (!zdev->fmb)
> +		return -ENOMSG;
> +	if (copy_from_user(&fmb_read, arg, sizeof(fmb_read)))
> +		return -EFAULT;
> +	if (!fmb_read.data)
> +		return -EINVAL;
> +
> +	memcpy(&fmb_temp, zdev->fmb, zdev->fmb_length);
> +	if (copy_to_user(fmb_read.data, &fmb_temp, zdev->fmb_length))
> +		return -EFAULT;

The bounce buffer itself seems unnecessary in this usage, we could just:

	if (copy_to_user(fmb_read.data, zdev->fmb, zdev->fmb_length))

But maybe there was an intention to scope the bounce buffer copy within
the guard and perform the copy_to_user() after releasing the lock?


> +
> +	return 0;
> +}
> diff --git a/include/uapi/linux/vfio.h b/include/uapi/linux/vfio.h
> index 5de618a3a5ee..3988e8690e0b 100644
> --- a/include/uapi/linux/vfio.h
> +++ b/include/uapi/linux/vfio.h
> @@ -1534,6 +1534,35 @@ struct vfio_device_feature_dma_buf {
>   */
>  #define VFIO_DEVICE_FEATURE_MIG_PRECOPY_INFOv2  12
>  
> +/**
> + * Upon VFIO_DEVICE_FEATURE_SET, enable or disable FMB for the VFIO zPCI device.
> + *
> + * enabled is treated as a bool, so any non-zero value evaluates to true. This
> + * feature fails on attempt to double enable/disable.

Does it?  Double enable just does a re-enable.

> + *
> + * Returns: 0 on success, -1 and errno set appropriately on error.
> + */
> +#define VFIO_DEVICE_FEATURE_ZPCI_FMB_ENABLE 13
> +
> +struct vfio_device_feature_zpci_fmb_enable {
> +	__u8 enabled;
> +};
> +
> +/**
> + * Upon VFIO_DEVICE_FEATURE_GET, provide FMB passthrough for VFIO zPCI devices.
> + *
> + * The user-provided buffer must be at least fmb_length large, where fmb_length
> + * is reported in VFIO_DEVICE_INFO_CAP_ZPCI_BASE.
> + *
> + * Returns: 0 on success, -1 and errno set appropriately on error. errno==ENOMSG
> + * when the FMB is not enabled.
> + */
> +#define VFIO_DEVICE_FEATURE_ZPCI_FMB_READ 14
> +
> +struct vfio_device_feature_zpci_fmb_read {
> +	void __user *data;

We should use explicit data sizes for uAPI:

	__aligned_u64 data;

Thanks,
Alex