linux-kernel - Re: [RFC v3 07/15] iommu: iommu_get/put_single

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <56C5FCF4.4010509@linaro.org>
Date:	Thu, 18 Feb 2016 18:18:44 +0100
From:	Eric Auger <eric.auger@...aro.org>
To:	Marc Zyngier <marc.zyngier@....com>
Cc:	eric.auger@...com, alex.williamson@...hat.com, will.deacon@....com,
	joro@...tes.org, tglx@...utronix.de, jason@...edaemon.net,
	christoffer.dall@...aro.org, linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
	kvmarm@...ts.cs.columbia.edu, kvm@...r.kernel.org,
	suravee.suthikulpanit@....com, patches@...aro.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Manish.Jaggi@...iumnetworks.com,
	Bharat.Bhushan@...escale.com, pranav.sawargaonkar@...il.com,
	p.fedin@...sung.com, iommu@...ts.linux-foundation.org,
	sherry.hurwitz@....com, brijesh.singh@....com, leo.duran@....com,
	Thomas.Lendacky@....com
Subject: Re: [RFC v3 07/15] iommu: iommu_get/put_single_reserved

Hi Marc,
On 02/18/2016 05:51 PM, Marc Zyngier wrote:
> On 18/02/16 16:42, Eric Auger wrote:
>> Hello,
>> On 02/18/2016 12:06 PM, Marc Zyngier wrote:
>>> On Fri, 12 Feb 2016 08:13:09 +0000
>>> Eric Auger <eric.auger@...aro.org> wrote:
>>>
>>>> This patch introduces iommu_get/put_single_reserved.
>>>>
>>>> iommu_get_single_reserved allows to allocate a new reserved iova page
>>>> and map it onto the physical page that contains a given physical address.
>>>> It returns the iova that is mapped onto the provided physical address.
>>>> Hence the physical address passed in argument does not need to be aligned.
>>>>
>>>> In case a mapping already exists between both pages, the IOVA mapped
>>>> to the PA is directly returned.
>>>>
>>>> Each time an iova is successfully returned a binding ref count is
>>>> incremented.
>>>>
>>>> iommu_put_single_reserved decrements the ref count and when this latter
>>>> is null, the mapping is destroyed and the iova is released.
>>>
>>> I wonder if there is a requirement for the caller to find out about the
>>> size of the mapping, or to impose a given size... MSIs clearly do not
>>> have that requirement (this is always a 32bit value), but since. 
>>> allocations usually pair address and size, I though I'd ask...
>> Yes. Currently this only makes sure the host PA is mapped and returns
>> the corresponding IOVA. It is part of the discussion we need to have on
>> the API besides the problematic of which API it should belong to.
> 
> One of the issues I have with the API at the moment is that there is no
> control on the page size. Imagine you have allocated a 4kB IOVA window
> for your MSI, but your IOMMU can only map 64kB (not unreasonable to
> imagine on arm64). What happens then?
The code checks the IOVA window size is aligned with the IOMMU page size
so I think that case is handled at iova domain creation
(arm_smmu_alloc_reserved_iova_domain).
> 
> Somehow, userspace should be told about it, one way or another.
I agree on that point. The user-space should be provided with the
information about the requested iova pool size and alignments. This is
missing in current rfc series.

Best Regards

Eric
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> 	M.
>