| 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: Tue, 21 Oct 2014 08:37:54 -0600
From: Alex Williamson <alex.williamson@...hat.com>
To: Antonios Motakis <a.motakis@...tualopensystems.com>
Cc: kvm-arm <kvmarm@...ts.cs.columbia.edu>,
Linux IOMMU <iommu@...ts.linux-foundation.org>,
Will Deacon <will.deacon@....com>,
VirtualOpenSystems Technical Team <tech@...tualopensystems.com>,
Christoffer Dall <christoffer.dall@...aro.org>,
Eric Auger <eric.auger@...aro.org>,
Kim Phillips <kim.phillips@...escale.com>,
Marc Zyngier <marc.zyngier@....com>,
"open list:VFIO DRIVER" <kvm@...r.kernel.org>,
open list <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 5/5] vfio/iommu_type1: implement the
VFIO_DMA_MAP_FLAG_NOEXEC flag
On Tue, 2014-10-21 at 14:40 +0200, Antonios Motakis wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 20, 2014 at 11:13 PM, Alex Williamson
> <alex.williamson@...hat.com> wrote:
> > On Mon, 2014-10-13 at 15:09 +0200, Antonios Motakis wrote:
> >> Some IOMMU drivers, such as the ARM SMMU driver, make available the
> >> IOMMU_NOEXEC flag, to set the page tables for a device as XN (execute never).
> >> This affects devices such as the ARM PL330 DMA Controller, which respects
> >> this flag and will refuse to fetch DMA instructions from memory where the
> >> XN flag has been set.
> >>
> >> The flag can be used only if all IOMMU domains behind the container support
> >> the IOMMU_NOEXEC flag. Also, if any mappings are created with the flag, any
> >> new domains with devices will have to support it as well.
> >>
> >> Signed-off-by: Antonios Motakis <a.motakis@...tualopensystems.com>
> >> ---
> >> drivers/vfio/vfio_iommu_type1.c | 25 ++++++++++++++++++++++++-
> >> 1 file changed, 24 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> >>
> >> diff --git a/drivers/vfio/vfio_iommu_type1.c b/drivers/vfio/vfio_iommu_type1.c
> >> index 8b4202a..e225e8f 100644
> >> --- a/drivers/vfio/vfio_iommu_type1.c
> >> +++ b/drivers/vfio/vfio_iommu_type1.c
> >> @@ -569,6 +569,12 @@ static int vfio_dma_do_map(struct vfio_iommu *iommu,
> >> if (map->flags & VFIO_DMA_MAP_FLAG_READ)
> >> prot |= IOMMU_READ;
> >>
> >> + if (map->flags & VFIO_DMA_MAP_FLAG_NOEXEC) {
> >> + if (!vfio_domains_have_iommu_cap(iommu, IOMMU_CAP_NOEXEC))
> >> + return -EINVAL;
> >> + prot |= IOMMU_NOEXEC;
> >> + }
> >> +
> >> if (!prot || !size || (size | iova | vaddr) & mask)
> >> return -EINVAL;
> >
> > I think this test needs to move above adding the NOEXEC flag, otherwise
> > we now allow mappings without read or write, which is an ABI change.
> >
>
> Ack.
>
> >>
> >> @@ -662,6 +668,14 @@ static int vfio_iommu_replay(struct vfio_iommu *iommu,
> >> dma = rb_entry(n, struct vfio_dma, node);
> >> iova = dma->iova;
> >>
> >> + /*
> >> + * if any of the mappings to be replayed has the NOEXEC flag
> >> + * set, then the new iommu domain must support it
> >> + */
> >> + if ((dma->prot | IOMMU_NOEXEC) &&
> >
> > I think you mean
> >
> > & IOMMU_NOEXEC
>
> Ack.
>
> >
> >> + !(domain->caps & IOMMU_CAP_NOEXEC))
> >> + return -EINVAL;
> >> +
> >
> > In patch 2/5 you stated:
> >
> > The IOMMU_NOEXEC flag needs to be available for all the IOMMUs
> > of the container used.
> >
> > But here you'll create heterogeneous containers so long as there are no
> > NOEXEC mappings. Is that intentional or a side effect of the above
> > masking bug?
> >
>
> Yeah, my intention was to not stop the user of having heterogeneous
> containers, as long as he doesn't care about using the NOEXEC flag. As
> soon as the user tries to apply this flag however, then it should be
> supported by all the IOMMUs behind the container - otherwise it is not
> enforceable.
>
> Do you think we should change this behavior? I think most users will
> not care about using this flag, and we should not stop them from
> mixing containers.
I think that's a reasonable way to go, but let's add a comment in uapi
vfio.h describing that expectation. Thanks,
Alex
> >> while (iova < dma->iova + dma->size) {
> >> phys_addr_t phys = iommu_iova_to_phys(d->domain, iova);
> >> size_t size;
> >> @@ -749,6 +763,9 @@ static int vfio_iommu_type1_attach_group(void *iommu_data,
> >> if (iommu_capable(bus, IOMMU_CAP_CACHE_COHERENCY))
> >> domain->caps |= IOMMU_CAP_CACHE_COHERENCY;
> >>
> >> + if (iommu_capable(bus, IOMMU_CAP_NOEXEC))
> >> + domain->caps |= IOMMU_CAP_NOEXEC;
> >> +
> >> /*
> >> * Try to match an existing compatible domain. We don't want to
> >> * preclude an IOMMU driver supporting multiple bus_types and being
> >> @@ -900,6 +917,11 @@ static long vfio_iommu_type1_ioctl(void *iommu_data,
> >> return 0;
> >> return vfio_domains_have_iommu_cap(iommu,
> >> IOMMU_CAP_CACHE_COHERENCY);
> >> + case VFIO_DMA_NOEXEC_IOMMU:
> >> + if (!iommu)
> >> + return 0;
> >> + return vfio_domains_have_iommu_cap(iommu,
> >> + IOMMU_CAP_NOEXEC);
> >> default:
> >> return 0;
> >> }
> >> @@ -923,7 +945,8 @@ static long vfio_iommu_type1_ioctl(void *iommu_data,
> >> } else if (cmd == VFIO_IOMMU_MAP_DMA) {
> >> struct vfio_iommu_type1_dma_map map;
> >> uint32_t mask = VFIO_DMA_MAP_FLAG_READ |
> >> - VFIO_DMA_MAP_FLAG_WRITE;
> >> + VFIO_DMA_MAP_FLAG_WRITE |
> >> + VFIO_DMA_MAP_FLAG_NOEXEC;
> >>
> >> minsz = offsetofend(struct vfio_iommu_type1_dma_map, size);
> >>
> >
> >
> >
>
>
>
--
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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists