1. Patchew
  2. linux
  3. View series

[PATCH] drm/nouveau: check ioctl command codes better

Arnd Bergmann posted 1 patch 2 months, 3 weeks ago 
drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/nouveau_drm.c | 11 +++++------
1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
[PATCH] drm/nouveau: check ioctl command codes better
Posted by Arnd Bergmann 2 months, 3 weeks ago 
From: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>

nouveau_drm_ioctl() only checks the _IOC_NR() bits in the DRM_NOUVEAU_NVIF
command, but ignores the type and direction bits, so any command with
'7' in the low eight bits gets passed into nouveau_abi16_ioctl() instead
of drm_ioctl().

Check for all the bits except the size that is handled inside of the handler.

Fixes: 27111a23d01c ("drm/nouveau: expose the full object/event interfaces to userspace")
Signed-off-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
---
 drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/nouveau_drm.c | 11 +++++------
 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)

diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/nouveau_drm.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/nouveau_drm.c
index 1527b801f013..506eeb44f0d4 100644
--- a/drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/nouveau_drm.c
+++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/nouveau_drm.c
@@ -1284,6 +1284,9 @@ nouveau_ioctls[] = {
 	DRM_IOCTL_DEF_DRV(NOUVEAU_EXEC, nouveau_exec_ioctl_exec, DRM_RENDER_ALLOW),
 };
 
+#define DRM_IOCTL_NOUVEAU_NVIV _IOC(_IOC_READ|_IOC_WRITE, DRM_IOCTL_BASE, \
+				    DRM_COMMAND_BASE + DRM_NOUVEAU_NVIF, 0)
+
 long
 nouveau_drm_ioctl(struct file *file, unsigned int cmd, unsigned long arg)
 {
@@ -1297,14 +1300,10 @@ nouveau_drm_ioctl(struct file *file, unsigned int cmd, unsigned long arg)
 		return ret;
 	}
 
-	switch (_IOC_NR(cmd) - DRM_COMMAND_BASE) {
-	case DRM_NOUVEAU_NVIF:
+	if ((cmd & ~IOCSIZE_MASK) == DRM_IOCTL_NOUVEAU_NVIV)
 		ret = nouveau_abi16_ioctl(filp, (void __user *)arg, _IOC_SIZE(cmd));
-		break;
-	default:
+	else
 		ret = drm_ioctl(file, cmd, arg);
-		break;
-	}
 
 	pm_runtime_mark_last_busy(dev->dev);
 	pm_runtime_put_autosuspend(dev->dev);
-- 
2.39.5
Re: [PATCH] drm/nouveau: check ioctl command codes better
Posted by Danilo Krummrich 2 months, 3 weeks ago 
On Fri Jul 11, 2025 at 9:24 AM CEST, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> From: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
>
> nouveau_drm_ioctl() only checks the _IOC_NR() bits in the DRM_NOUVEAU_NVIF
> command, but ignores the type and direction bits, so any command with
> '7' in the low eight bits gets passed into nouveau_abi16_ioctl() instead
> of drm_ioctl().
>
> Check for all the bits except the size that is handled inside of the handler.
>
> Fixes: 27111a23d01c ("drm/nouveau: expose the full object/event interfaces to userspace")
> Signed-off-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>

Applied to drm-misc-fixes, thanks!

  [ Fix up two checkpatch warnings and a typo. - Danilo ]
Re: [PATCH] drm/nouveau: check ioctl command codes better
Posted by Danilo Krummrich 2 months, 3 weeks ago 
On Fri Jul 11, 2025 at 9:24 AM CEST, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> From: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
>
> nouveau_drm_ioctl() only checks the _IOC_NR() bits in the DRM_NOUVEAU_NVIF
> command, but ignores the type and direction bits, so any command with
> '7' in the low eight bits gets passed into nouveau_abi16_ioctl() instead
> of drm_ioctl().
>
> Check for all the bits except the size that is handled inside of the handler.
>
> Fixes: 27111a23d01c ("drm/nouveau: expose the full object/event interfaces to userspace")
> Signed-off-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
> ---
>  drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/nouveau_drm.c | 11 +++++------
>  1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/nouveau_drm.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/nouveau_drm.c
> index 1527b801f013..506eeb44f0d4 100644
> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/nouveau_drm.c
> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/nouveau_drm.c
> @@ -1284,6 +1284,9 @@ nouveau_ioctls[] = {
>  	DRM_IOCTL_DEF_DRV(NOUVEAU_EXEC, nouveau_exec_ioctl_exec, DRM_RENDER_ALLOW),
>  };
>  
> +#define DRM_IOCTL_NOUVEAU_NVIV _IOC(_IOC_READ|_IOC_WRITE, DRM_IOCTL_BASE, \
> +				    DRM_COMMAND_BASE + DRM_NOUVEAU_NVIF, 0)

Is there any intention behind NVIV vs NVIF? Indicator that size is not
considered?

> +
>  long
>  nouveau_drm_ioctl(struct file *file, unsigned int cmd, unsigned long arg)
>  {
> @@ -1297,14 +1300,10 @@ nouveau_drm_ioctl(struct file *file, unsigned int cmd, unsigned long arg)
>  		return ret;
>  	}
>  
> -	switch (_IOC_NR(cmd) - DRM_COMMAND_BASE) {
> -	case DRM_NOUVEAU_NVIF:
> +	if ((cmd & ~IOCSIZE_MASK) == DRM_IOCTL_NOUVEAU_NVIV)
>  		ret = nouveau_abi16_ioctl(filp, (void __user *)arg, _IOC_SIZE(cmd));
> -		break;
> -	default:
> +	else
>  		ret = drm_ioctl(file, cmd, arg);
> -		break;
> -	}
>  
>  	pm_runtime_mark_last_busy(dev->dev);
>  	pm_runtime_put_autosuspend(dev->dev);
Re: [PATCH] drm/nouveau: check ioctl command codes better
Posted by Arnd Bergmann 2 months, 3 weeks ago 
On Fri, Jul 11, 2025, at 19:41, Danilo Krummrich wrote:
> On Fri Jul 11, 2025 at 9:24 AM CEST, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
>> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/nouveau_drm.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/nouveau_drm.c
>> index 1527b801f013..506eeb44f0d4 100644
>> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/nouveau_drm.c
>> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/nouveau_drm.c
>> @@ -1284,6 +1284,9 @@ nouveau_ioctls[] = {
>>  	DRM_IOCTL_DEF_DRV(NOUVEAU_EXEC, nouveau_exec_ioctl_exec, DRM_RENDER_ALLOW),
>>  };
>>  
>> +#define DRM_IOCTL_NOUVEAU_NVIV _IOC(_IOC_READ|_IOC_WRITE, DRM_IOCTL_BASE, \
>> +				    DRM_COMMAND_BASE + DRM_NOUVEAU_NVIF, 0)
>
> Is there any intention behind NVIV vs NVIF? Indicator that size is not
> considered?

No, just a typo, my mistake.

      Arnd

Patchew 2.1-devel-b67e4c2

© 2016 - 2025 Red Hat, Inc.