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
| ||
|
Message-ID: <5614D13F.7020008@cloudius-systems.com> Date: Wed, 7 Oct 2015 11:01:03 +0300 From: Vlad Zolotarov <vladz@...udius-systems.com> To: Avi Kivity <avi@...lladb.com>, Stephen Hemminger <stephen@...workplumber.org>, Alex Williamson <alex.williamson@...hat.com> Cc: "Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@...hat.com>, Greg KH <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>, Linux Kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, hjk@...sjkoch.de, Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net>, "Bruce.Richardson@...el.com" <bruce.richardson@...el.com>, avi@...udius-systems.com, gleb@...udius-systems.com, Alexander Duyck <alexander.duyck@...il.com> Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 2/3] uio_pci_generic: add MSI/MSI-X support On 10/07/15 11:00, Vlad Zolotarov wrote: > > > On 10/07/15 09:53, Avi Kivity wrote: >> On 10/07/2015 12:58 AM, Stephen Hemminger wrote: >>> Go ahead and submit a seperate taint bit for UIO as a patch. >>> >> >> Taint should only be applied if bus mastering is enabled (to avoid >> annoying the users of the original uio use case) > > Pls., note that this series would enable the legacy INT#X mode if > possible By default I meant. > and this, of course, without enabling bus mastering and without > tainting the kernel. > This means that the current users of uio_pci_generic won't feel/get > any difference after/if these patches are applied since before these > patches it could only be used with the devices that do have INT#X > capability. > >> >>> >>> On Tue, Oct 6, 2015 at 10:41 PM, Alex Williamson >>> <alex.williamson@...hat.com <mailto:alex.williamson@...hat.com>> wrote: >>> >>> On Tue, 2015-10-06 at 22:32 +0100, Stephen Hemminger wrote: >>> > On Tue, 06 Oct 2015 12:51:20 -0600 >>> > Alex Williamson <alex.williamson@...hat.com >>> <mailto:alex.williamson@...hat.com>> wrote: >>> > >>> > > Of course this is entirely unsafe and this no-iommu driver >>> should taint >>> > > the kernel, but it at least standardizes on one userspace API >>> and you're >>> > > already doing completely unsafe things with uio. vfio >>> should be >>> > > enlightened at least to the point that it allows only >>> privileged users >>> > > access to devices under such a (lack of) iommu >>> > >>> > I agree with the design, but not with the taint argument. >>> > (Unless you want to taint any and all use of UIO drivers which >>> can >>> > already do this). >>> >>> Yes, actually, if the bus master bit gets enabled all bets are >>> off. I >>> don't see how that leaves a supportable kernel, so we might as well >>> taint it. Isn't this exactly why we taint for proprietary >>> drivers, we >>> have no idea what it has mucked with in kernel space. This just >>> moves >>> the proprietary driver out to userspace without an iommu to >>> protect the >>> host. Thanks, >>> >>> Alex >>> >>> >> > -- 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