| lists.openwall.net | lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC | |
|
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
| ||
|
Date: Fri, 8 Dec 2017 12:23:58 -0800
From: Jacob Pan <jacob.jun.pan@...ux.intel.com>
To: Alex Williamson <alex.williamson@...hat.com>
Cc: iommu@...ts.linux-foundation.org,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Joerg Roedel <joro@...tes.org>,
David Woodhouse <dwmw2@...radead.org>,
Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
Rafael Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@...el.com>,
"Liu, Yi L" <yi.l.liu@...el.com>,
Lan Tianyu <tianyu.lan@...el.com>,
"Tian, Kevin" <kevin.tian@...el.com>,
Raj Ashok <ashok.raj@...el.com>,
Jean Delvare <khali@...ux-fr.org>,
"Christoph Hellwig" <hch@...radead.org>,
jacob.jun.pan@...ux.intel.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 10/16] iommu: introduce device fault report API
On Thu, 7 Dec 2017 14:27:25 -0700
Alex Williamson <alex.williamson@...hat.com> wrote:
> On Fri, 17 Nov 2017 10:55:08 -0800
> Jacob Pan <jacob.jun.pan@...ux.intel.com> wrote:
>
> > Traditionally, device specific faults are detected and handled
> > within their own device drivers. When IOMMU is enabled, faults such
> > as DMA related transactions are detected by IOMMU. There is no
> > generic reporting mechanism to report faults back to the in-kernel
> > device driver or the guest OS in case of assigned devices.
> >
> > Faults detected by IOMMU is based on the transaction's source ID
> > which can be reported at per device basis, regardless of the device
> > type is a PCI device or not.
> >
> > The fault types include recoverable (e.g. page request) and
> > unrecoverable faults(e.g. access error). In most cases, faults can
> > be handled by IOMMU drivers internally. The primary use cases are as
> > follows:
> > 1. page request fault originated from an SVM capable device that is
> > assigned to guest via vIOMMU. In this case, the first level page
> > tables are owned by the guest. Page request must be propagated to
> > the guest to let guest OS fault in the pages then send page
> > response. In this mechanism, the direct receiver of IOMMU fault
> > notification is VFIO, which can relay notification events to QEMU
> > or other user space software.
> >
> > 2. faults need more subtle handling by device drivers. Other than
> > simply invoke reset function, there are needs to let device driver
> > handle the fault with a smaller impact.
> >
> > This patchset is intended to create a generic fault report API such
> > that it can scale as follows:
> > - all IOMMU types
> > - PCI and non-PCI devices
> > - recoverable and unrecoverable faults
> > - VFIO and other other in kernel users
> > - DMA & IRQ remapping (TBD)
> > The original idea was brought up by David Woodhouse and discussions
> > summarized at https://lwn.net/Articles/608914/.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Jacob Pan <jacob.jun.pan@...ux.intel.com>
> > Signed-off-by: Ashok Raj <ashok.raj@...el.com>
> > ---
> > drivers/iommu/iommu.c | 63
> > ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-
> > include/linux/iommu.h | 36 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ 2 files
> > changed, 98 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/iommu/iommu.c b/drivers/iommu/iommu.c
> > index 829e9e9..97b7990 100644
> > --- a/drivers/iommu/iommu.c
> > +++ b/drivers/iommu/iommu.c
> > @@ -581,6 +581,12 @@ int iommu_group_add_device(struct iommu_group
> > *group, struct device *dev) goto err_free_name;
> > }
> >
> > + dev->iommu_param = kzalloc(sizeof(struct
> > iommu_fault_param), GFP_KERNEL);
> > + if (!dev->iommu_param) {
> > + ret = -ENOMEM;
> > + goto err_free_name;
> > + }
> > +
> > kobject_get(group->devices_kobj);
> >
> > dev->iommu_group = group;
> > @@ -657,7 +663,7 @@ void iommu_group_remove_device(struct device
> > *dev) sysfs_remove_link(&dev->kobj, "iommu_group");
> >
> > trace_remove_device_from_group(group->id, dev);
> > -
> > + kfree(dev->iommu_param);
> > kfree(device->name);
> > kfree(device);
> > dev->iommu_group = NULL;
> > @@ -791,6 +797,61 @@ int iommu_group_unregister_notifier(struct
> > iommu_group *group, }
> > EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(iommu_group_unregister_notifier);
> >
> > +int iommu_register_device_fault_handler(struct device *dev,
> > + iommu_dev_fault_handler_t
> > handler,
> > + void *data)
> > +{
> > + struct iommu_param *idata = dev->iommu_param;
> > +
> > + /*
> > + * Device iommu_param should have been allocated when
> > device is
> > + * added to its iommu_group.
> > + */
> > + if (!idata)
> > + return -EINVAL;
> > + /* Only allow one fault handler registered for each device
> > */
> > + if (idata->fault_param)
> > + return -EBUSY;
> > + get_device(dev);
> > + idata->fault_param =
> > + kzalloc(sizeof(struct iommu_fault_param),
> > GFP_KERNEL);
> > + if (!idata->fault_param)
> > + return -ENOMEM;
> > + idata->fault_param->handler = handler;
> > + idata->fault_param->data = data;
> > +
> > + return 0;
> > +}
> > +EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(iommu_register_device_fault_handler);
> > +
> > +int iommu_unregister_device_fault_handler(struct device *dev)
> > +{
> > + struct iommu_param *idata = dev->iommu_param;
> > +
> > + if (!idata)
> > + return -EINVAL;
> > +
> > + kfree(idata->fault_param);
> > + idata->fault_param = NULL;
> > + put_device(dev);
> > +
> > + return 0;
> > +}
> > +EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(iommu_unregister_device_fault_handler);
> > +
> > +
> > +int iommu_report_device_fault(struct device *dev, struct
> > iommu_fault_event *evt) +{
> > + /* we only report device fault if there is a handler
> > registered */
> > + if (!dev->iommu_param || !dev->iommu_param->fault_param ||
> > + !dev->iommu_param->fault_param->handler)
> > + return -ENOSYS;
> > +
> > + return dev->iommu_param->fault_param->handler(evt,
> > +
> > dev->iommu_param->fault_param->data); +}
> > +EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(iommu_report_device_fault);
> > +
>
> Isn't this all rather racy? I see that we can have multiple callers
> to register racing.
I agree, should use a lock here to prevent unregister. For multiple
caller race, it won't happen since there is only one caller can
register handler.
> Unregister is buggy, allowing any caller to
> decrement the device reference regardless of whether there's one
> outstanding through this interface. The reporting callout can also
> race with an unregistration. Might need a mutex on iommu_param to
> avoid.
>
you are right, forgot to check outstanding handler. will add mutex also.
Thanks,
> > /**
> > * iommu_group_id - Return ID for a group
> > * @group: the group to ID
> > diff --git a/include/linux/iommu.h b/include/linux/iommu.h
> > index dfda89b..841c044 100644
> > --- a/include/linux/iommu.h
> > +++ b/include/linux/iommu.h
> > @@ -463,6 +463,14 @@ extern int
> > iommu_group_register_notifier(struct iommu_group *group, struct
> > notifier_block *nb); extern int
> > iommu_group_unregister_notifier(struct iommu_group *group, struct
> > notifier_block *nb); +extern int
> > iommu_register_device_fault_handler(struct device *dev,
> > + iommu_dev_fault_handler_t
> > handler,
> > + void *data);
> > +
> > +extern int iommu_unregister_device_fault_handler(struct device
> > *dev); +
> > +extern int iommu_report_device_fault(struct device *dev, struct
> > iommu_fault_event *evt); +
> > extern int iommu_group_id(struct iommu_group *group);
> > extern struct iommu_group *iommu_group_get_for_dev(struct device
> > *dev); extern struct iommu_domain
> > *iommu_group_default_domain(struct iommu_group *); @@ -481,6
> > +489,12 @@ extern void iommu_domain_window_disable(struct
> > iommu_domain *domain, u32 wnd_nr) extern int
> > report_iommu_fault(struct iommu_domain *domain, struct device *dev,
> > unsigned long iova, int flags); +static inline bool
> > iommu_has_device_fault_handler(struct device *dev) +{
> > + return dev->iommu_param && dev->iommu_param->fault_param &&
> > + dev->iommu_param->fault_param->handler;
> > +}
> > +
>
> This interface is racy by design, there's no guarantee that the
> handler isn't immediately unregistered after this check. Thanks,
>
right, I will fold this check into report function and protect by a
lock. I was trying to save some cycles but it would not work with the
race condition.
> Alex
>
> > static inline void iommu_flush_tlb_all(struct iommu_domain *domain)
> > {
> > if (domain->ops->flush_iotlb_all)
> > @@ -734,6 +748,28 @@ static inline int
> > iommu_group_unregister_notifier(struct iommu_group *group, return 0;
> > }
> >
> > +static inline int iommu_register_device_fault_handler(struct
> > device *dev,
> > +
> > iommu_dev_fault_handler_t handler,
> > + void *data)
> > +{
> > + return 0;
> > +}
> > +
> > +static inline int iommu_unregister_device_fault_handler(struct
> > device *dev) +{
> > + return 0;
> > +}
> > +
> > +static inline bool iommu_has_device_fault_handler(struct device
> > *dev) +{
> > + return false;
> > +}
> > +
> > +static inline int iommu_report_device_fault(struct device *dev,
> > struct iommu_fault_event *evt) +{
> > + return 0;
> > +}
> > +
> > static inline int iommu_group_id(struct iommu_group *group)
> > {
> > return -ENODEV;
>
[Jacob Pan]
Powered by blists - more mailing lists