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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket
[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20170428144634.7950c8cf@thinkpad>
Date:   Fri, 28 Apr 2017 14:46:34 +0200
From:   Gerald Schaefer <gerald.schaefer@...ibm.com>
To:     Joerg Roedel <joro@...tes.org>
Cc:     Sebastian Ott <sebott@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
        iommu@...ts.linux-foundation.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 0/2] iommu/s390: Fix iommu-groups and add sysfs
 support

Hi Joerg,

I guess we are a bit special on s390 (again), see below. Sebastian is more
familiar with the base s390 PCI code, he may correct me if I'm wrong.

On Thu, 27 Apr 2017 23:03:25 +0200
Joerg Roedel <joro@...tes.org> wrote:

> > Well, there is a separate zpci_dev for each pci_dev on s390,
> > and each of those has its own separate dma-table (thus not shared).  
> 
> Is that true for all functions of a PCIe card, so does every function of
> a device has its own zpci_dev structure and thus its own DMA-table?

Yes, clp_add_pci_device() is called for every function, which in turn calls
zpci_create_device() with a freshly allocated zdev. zpci_enable_device()
then sets up a new DMA address space for each function.

> My assumption came from the fact that the zpci_dev is read from
> pci_dev->sysdata, which is propagated there from the pci_bridge
> through the pci_root_bus structures.

The zdev gets there via zpci_create_device() -> zpci_scan_bus() ->
pci_scan_root_bus(), which is done for every single function.

Not sure if I understand this right, but it looks like we set up a new PCI
bus for each function.

> > Given this "separate zpci_dev for each pci_dev" situation, I don't
> > see what this update actually changes, compared to the previous code,
> > see also my comments to that patch.  
> 
> The add_device call-back is invoked for every function of a pci-device,
> because each function gets its own pci_dev structure. Also we usually
> group all functions of a PCI-device together into one iommu-group,
> because we don't trust that the device isolates its functions from each
> other.

OK, but similar to the add_device callback, zpci_create_device() is
also invoked for every function. So, allocating a new iommu-group in
zpci_create_device() will never lead to any group sharing.

I am however a bit confused now, about how we would have allowed group
sharing with the current s390 IOMMU code, or IOW in which scenario would
iommu_group_get() in the add_device callback find a shareable iommu-group?

In the attach_dev callback, we provide the option to "force" multiple
functions using the same iommu-domain / DMA address space, by de-registering
the per-function DMA address space and registering a common space. But
such functions would only be in the same iommu "domain" and not "group",
if I get this right.

So, I guess we may have an issue with not sharing iommu-groups when
it could make sense to do so. But your patch would not fix this, as
we still would allocate separate iommu-groups for all functions.

Regards,
Gerald

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ