linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] VFIO driver: Non-privileged user level PCI drivers

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

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20100602140155.GE11162@8bytes.org>
Date:	Wed, 2 Jun 2010 16:01:55 +0200
From:	Joerg Roedel <joro@...tes.org>
To:	"Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@...hat.com>
Cc:	Avi Kivity <avi@...hat.com>, Tom Lyon <pugs@...co.com>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, kvm@...r.kernel.org,
	chrisw@...s-sol.org, hjk@...utronix.de, gregkh@...e.de,
	aafabbri@...co.com, scofeldm@...co.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] VFIO driver: Non-privileged user level PCI drivers

On Wed, Jun 02, 2010 at 04:17:19PM +0300, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 02, 2010 at 02:50:50PM +0200, Joerg Roedel wrote:
> > On Wed, Jun 02, 2010 at 03:25:11PM +0300, Avi Kivity wrote:
> > > On 06/02/2010 03:19 PM, Joerg Roedel wrote:

> 
> > If its
> > required anyway the binding can happen implicitly. We could allow to do
> > a nop 'ioctl(dev1, SHARE, dev1)' to remove the asymmetry.
> 
> And then when we assign meaning to it we find that half the apps
> are broken because they did not call this ioctl.

The meaning is already assigned and chaning it means changing the
userspace-abi which is a no-go.

> This simple scenario ignores all the real-life corner cases.
> For example, with an explicit iommu open and bind application
> can naturally detect that:
> - we have run out of iommu domains

ioctl(dev, MAP, ...)  will fail in this case.

> - iommu is unsupported

Is best checked by open() anyway because userspace can't do anything
with the device before it is bound to a domain.

> - iommu is in use by another, incompatible device

How should this happen?

> - device is in bad state

How is this checked with your proposal and why can this not be detected
with my one?

> because each is a separate operation, so it is easy to produce meaningful
> errors.

Ok, this is true.

> Another interesting thing that a separate iommu device supports is when
> application A controls the iommu and application B
> controls the device.

Until Linux becomes a micro-kernel the IOMMU itself will _never_ be
controlled by an application.

> This might be good to e.g. improve security (B is run by root, A is
> unpriveledged and passes commands to/from B over a pipe).

Micro-kernel arguments. I hope a userspace controlled IOMMU in Linux
will never happen ;-)

	Joerg

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/