linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 2/5] iommu: Set PCI_BUS_FLAGS_MSI_REMAP if IOMMU have capability of IRQ remapping

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

Message-ID: <20160526034849.GE3208@localhost>
Date:	Wed, 25 May 2016 22:48:49 -0500
From:	Bjorn Helgaas <helgaas@...nel.org>
To:	Yongji Xie <xyjxie@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
Cc:	kvm@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-pci@...r.kernel.org, linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org,
	iommu@...ts.linux-foundation.org, alex.williamson@...hat.com,
	bhelgaas@...gle.com, aik@...abs.ru, benh@...nel.crashing.org,
	paulus@...ba.org, mpe@...erman.id.au, joro@...tes.org,
	warrier@...ux.vnet.ibm.com, zhong@...ux.vnet.ibm.com,
	nikunj@...ux.vnet.ibm.com, eric.auger@...aro.org,
	will.deacon@....com, gwshan@...ux.vnet.ibm.com,
	David.Laight@...LAB.COM, alistair@...ple.id.au, ruscur@...sell.cc
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/5] iommu: Set PCI_BUS_FLAGS_MSI_REMAP if IOMMU have
 capability of IRQ remapping

On Wed, May 25, 2016 at 01:54:23PM +0800, Yongji Xie wrote:
> On 2016/5/25 5:11, Bjorn Helgaas wrote:
> >On Wed, Apr 27, 2016 at 08:43:27PM +0800, Yongji Xie wrote:
> >>The capability of IRQ remapping is abstracted on IOMMU side on
> >>some archs. There is a existing flag IOMMU_CAP_INTR_REMAP for this.
> >>
> >>To have a universal flag to test this capability for different
> >>archs on PCI side, we set PCI_BUS_FLAGS_MSI_REMAP for PCI buses
> >>when IOMMU_CAP_INTR_REMAP is set.
> >>
> >>Signed-off-by: Yongji Xie <xyjxie@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
> >>---
> >>  drivers/iommu/iommu.c |   15 +++++++++++++++
> >>  1 file changed, 15 insertions(+)
> >>
> >>diff --git a/drivers/iommu/iommu.c b/drivers/iommu/iommu.c
> >>index 0e3b009..5d2b6f6 100644
> >>--- a/drivers/iommu/iommu.c
> >>+++ b/drivers/iommu/iommu.c
> >>@@ -813,6 +813,16 @@ struct iommu_group *pci_device_group(struct device *dev)
> >>  	return group;
> >>  }
> >>+static void pci_check_msi_remapping(struct pci_dev *pdev,
> >>+					const struct iommu_ops *ops)
> >>+{
> >>+	struct pci_bus *bus = pdev->bus;
> >>+
> >>+	if (ops->capable(IOMMU_CAP_INTR_REMAP) &&
> >>+		!(bus->bus_flags & PCI_BUS_FLAGS_MSI_REMAP))
> >>+		bus->bus_flags |= PCI_BUS_FLAGS_MSI_REMAP;
> >>+}
> >This looks an awful lot like the pci_bus_check_msi_remapping() you add
> >elsewhere.  Why do we need both?
> 
> I will modify this function as you suggested.  And we add this function
> here because some iommu drivers would be initialed after PCI probing.
>
> >>  /**
> >>   * iommu_group_get_for_dev - Find or create the IOMMU group for a device
> >>   * @dev: target device
> >>@@ -871,6 +881,9 @@ static int add_iommu_group(struct device *dev, void *data)
> >>  	const struct iommu_ops *ops = cb->ops;
> >>  	int ret;
> >>+	if (dev_is_pci(dev) && ops->capable)
> >>+		pci_check_msi_remapping(to_pci_dev(dev), ops);
> >>+
> >>  	if (!ops->add_device)
> >>  		return 0;
> >>@@ -913,6 +926,8 @@ static int iommu_bus_notifier(struct notifier_block *nb,
> >>  	 * result in ADD/DEL notifiers to group->notifier
> >>  	 */
> >>  	if (action == BUS_NOTIFY_ADD_DEVICE) {
> >>+		if (dev_is_pci(dev) && ops->capable)
> >>+			pci_check_msi_remapping(to_pci_dev(dev), ops);
> >These calls don't smell right either.  Why do we need dev_is_pci()
> >checks here?
> 
> Some platform devices may also call this.
> 
> >Can't this be done in the PCI probe path somehow, e.g.,
> >in pci_set_bus_msi_domain() or something?
> 
> Yes, this can be done in pci_create_root_bus(). But it could only
> handle the case that iommu drivers are initialed before PCI probing.

Hmm, that's sort of what I expected, but I don't like it.  I don't
think initializing IOMMU drivers after probing PCI devices is the
optimal design.  As soon as we add a PCI device, a driver can bind to
it and start using it.  If we set up an IOMMU after a driver has
claimed the device, something is going to break.  The driver may have
already made DMA mappings that would now be invalid.

IOMMU drivers are logically between the CPU and the device, so they
should be initialized before the device is enumerated.  I know there
are probably some legacy issues behind this design, and I know it has
nothing to do with your patch, so this is not a very constructive
comment.

I just want to be on record that I'm not a fan of this out-of-order
initialization, and I don't like the notification scheme for handling
device hotplug either.  Notifiers make the code hard to read, and you
can't tell what order things happen in.  It just seems like a hack to
connect things together when they should really have been designed to
be more tightly integrated from the beginning.

Bjorn