linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] vfio: platform: Fix using devices in PM Domains

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] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <4eedb2df-4bf8-814e-7e47-60faa646f4bf@redhat.com>
Date:   Fri, 13 Apr 2018 11:44:42 +0200
From:   Auger Eric <eric.auger@...hat.com>
To:     Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@...ux-m68k.org>
Cc:     Geert Uytterhoeven <geert+renesas@...der.be>,
        Baptiste Reynal <b.reynal@...tualopensystems.com>,
        Alex Williamson <alex.williamson@...hat.com>,
        "Rafael J . Wysocki" <rjw@...ysocki.net>,
        Kevin Hilman <khilman@...nel.org>,
        Ulf Hansson <ulf.hansson@...aro.org>,
        KVM list <kvm@...r.kernel.org>,
        Linux PM list <linux-pm@...r.kernel.org>,
        Linux-Renesas <linux-renesas-soc@...r.kernel.org>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] vfio: platform: Fix using devices in PM Domains

Hi Geert,

On 13/04/18 11:19, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
> Hi Eric,
> 
> On Fri, Apr 13, 2018 at 11:14 AM, Auger Eric <eric.auger@...hat.com> wrote:
>> On 11/04/18 11:24, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
>>> If a device is part of a PM Domain (e.g. power and/or clock domain), its
>>> power state is managed using Runtime PM.  Without Runtime PM, the device
>>> may not be powered up, causing subtle failures, crashes, or system
>>> lock-ups when the device is accessed by the guest.
>> the device may not be powered up/clcoked or power/clock may be switched
>> off while the guest uses it.
>>>
>>> Fix this by adding Runtime PM support, powering the device when the VFIO
>>> device is opened by the guest.
>>>
>>> Note that while more fine-grained power management could be implemented
>>> on the guest side, if exported, this would be inherently unsafe, as
>>> abusing it may kill the whole system.
>>
>> Please can you elaborate on this remark please?
> 
> If power-management of the device would be delegated to the guest, and the
> guest forgets to enable device power before accessing the device's registers,
> this could lock up the system, and thus disturb both the host and other guests.
Wouldn't you need to assign another device or use para-virt to allow the
guest to perform this power management control? I think you can remove
this paragraph from the commit message.

Thanks

Eric
> 
> Gr{oetje,eeting}s,
> 
>                         Geert
>