Re: [PATCH 24/24] XSM: fold xsm_{,un}bind_pt_irq() hooks

On 7/28/26 9:26 AM, Jan Beulich wrote:
> Like other resource management hooks they are mainly different in "add
> resource" vs "remove resource". Hence like in other cases a single hook
> can easily serve both purposes, with minor tweaking of
> flask_bind_pt_irq(). While adjusting that function, also defer the setting
> of "dperm", which is only needed in the "map" case.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Jan Beulich <[email protected]>
> 
> --- a/xen/arch/arm/domctl.c
> +++ b/xen/arch/arm/domctl.c
> @@ -104,7 +104,7 @@ long arch_do_domctl(struct xen_domctl *d
>           if ( rc )
>               return rc;
>   
> -        rc = xsm_bind_pt_irq(XSM_DM_PRIV, d, bind);
> +        rc = xsm_bind_pt_irq(XSM_DM_PRIV, d, bind, true);
>           if ( rc )
>               return rc;
>   
> @@ -140,7 +140,7 @@ long arch_do_domctl(struct xen_domctl *d
>           if ( irq != virq )
>               return -EINVAL;
>   
> -        rc = xsm_unbind_pt_irq(XSM_DM_PRIV, d, bind);
> +        rc = xsm_bind_pt_irq(XSM_DM_PRIV, d, bind, false);
>           if ( rc )
>               return rc;
>   
> --- a/xen/arch/x86/domctl.c
> +++ b/xen/arch/x86/domctl.c
> @@ -622,7 +622,7 @@ long arch_do_domctl(
>           if ( !is_hvm_domain(d) )
>               break;
>   
> -        ret = xsm_bind_pt_irq(XSM_DM_PRIV, d, bind);
> +        ret = xsm_bind_pt_irq(XSM_DM_PRIV, d, bind, true);
>           if ( ret )
>               break;
>   
> @@ -660,7 +660,7 @@ long arch_do_domctl(
>           if ( !is_hvm_domain(d) )
>               break;
>   
> -        ret = xsm_unbind_pt_irq(XSM_DM_PRIV, d, bind);
> +        ret = xsm_bind_pt_irq(XSM_DM_PRIV, d, bind, false);
>           if ( ret )
>               break;
>   
> --- a/xen/include/xsm/dummy.h
> +++ b/xen/include/xsm/dummy.h
> @@ -478,14 +478,8 @@ static XSM_INLINE int xsm_map_domain_irq
>   }
>   
>   static XSM_INLINE int xsm_bind_pt_irq(
> -    XSM_DEFAULT_ARG struct domain *d, struct xen_domctl_bind_pt_irq *bind)
> -{
> -    XSM_ASSERT_ACTION(XSM_DM_PRIV);
> -    return xsm_default_action(action, current->domain, d);
> -}
> -
> -static XSM_INLINE int xsm_unbind_pt_irq(
> -    XSM_DEFAULT_ARG struct domain *d, struct xen_domctl_bind_pt_irq *bind)
> +    XSM_DEFAULT_ARG struct domain *d, struct xen_domctl_bind_pt_irq *bind,
> +    bool allow)
>   {
>       XSM_ASSERT_ACTION(XSM_DM_PRIV);
>       return xsm_default_action(action, current->domain, d);
> --- a/xen/include/xsm/hooks.h
> +++ b/xen/include/xsm/hooks.h
> @@ -72,8 +72,8 @@ XSM_HOOK(int, map_domain_pirq, struct do
>   #endif
>   
>   XSM_HOOK(int, map_domain_irq, struct domain *, int, const pci_sbdf_t *, bool)
> -XSM_HOOK(int, bind_pt_irq, struct domain *, struct xen_domctl_bind_pt_irq *)
> -XSM_HOOK(int, unbind_pt_irq, struct domain *, struct xen_domctl_bind_pt_irq *)
> +XSM_HOOK(int, bind_pt_irq, struct domain *, struct xen_domctl_bind_pt_irq *,
> +                           bool)
>   
>   XSM_HOOK(int, irq_permission, struct domain *, int, bool)
>   XSM_HOOK(int, iomem_permission, struct domain *, uint64_t, uint64_t, bool)
> --- a/xen/xsm/flask/hooks.c
> +++ b/xen/xsm/flask/hooks.c
> @@ -1090,16 +1090,15 @@ static int cf_check flask_map_domain_irq
>   }
>   
>   static int cf_check flask_bind_pt_irq(
> -    struct domain *d, struct xen_domctl_bind_pt_irq *bind)
> +    struct domain *d, struct xen_domctl_bind_pt_irq *bind, bool access)
>   {
> -    uint32_t dsid, rsid;
> +    uint32_t dsid, rsid, dperm;
>       int rc = -EPERM;
>       int irq;
>       struct avc_audit_data ad;
> -    uint32_t dperm = flask_iommu_resource_use_perm(d);
>   
> -    rc = current_has_perm(d, SECCLASS_RESOURCE, RESOURCE__ADD);
> -    if ( rc )
> +    rc = current_has_perm(d, SECCLASS_RESOURCE, resource_to_perm(access));
> +    if ( rc || access )

Same as on patch 23, check is inverted.

v/r,
dps