linux-kernel - Re: [RFC PATCH V2 5/5] vhost: access vq metadata through kernel virtual address

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]

Date:   Thu, 7 Mar 2019 22:43:12 -0500
From:   "Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@...hat.com>
To:     Jerome Glisse <jglisse@...hat.com>
Cc:     Jason Wang <jasowang@...hat.com>, kvm@...r.kernel.org,
        virtualization@...ts.linux-foundation.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, peterx@...hat.com,
        linux-mm@...ck.org, aarcange@...hat.com
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH V2 5/5] vhost: access vq metadata through kernel
 virtual address

On Thu, Mar 07, 2019 at 10:40:53PM -0500, Jerome Glisse wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 07, 2019 at 10:16:00PM -0500, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> > On Thu, Mar 07, 2019 at 09:55:39PM -0500, Jerome Glisse wrote:
> > > On Thu, Mar 07, 2019 at 09:21:03PM -0500, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> > > > On Thu, Mar 07, 2019 at 02:17:20PM -0500, Jerome Glisse wrote:
> > > > > > It's because of all these issues that I preferred just accessing
> > > > > > userspace memory and handling faults. Unfortunately there does not
> > > > > > appear to exist an API that whitelists a specific driver along the lines
> > > > > > of "I checked this code for speculative info leaks, don't add barriers
> > > > > > on data path please".
> > > > > 
> > > > > Maybe it would be better to explore adding such helper then remapping
> > > > > page into kernel address space ?
> > > > 
> > > > I explored it a bit (see e.g. thread around: "__get_user slower than
> > > > get_user") and I can tell you it's not trivial given the issue is around
> > > > security.  So in practice it does not seem fair to keep a significant
> > > > optimization out of kernel because *maybe* we can do it differently even
> > > > better :)
> > > 
> > > Maybe a slightly different approach between this patchset and other
> > > copy user API would work here. What you want really is something like
> > > a temporary mlock on a range of memory so that it is safe for the
> > > kernel to access range of userspace virtual address ie page are
> > > present and with proper permission hence there can be no page fault
> > > while you are accessing thing from kernel context.
> > > 
> > > So you can have like a range structure and mmu notifier. When you
> > > lock the range you block mmu notifier to allow your code to work on
> > > the userspace VA safely. Once you are done you unlock and let the
> > > mmu notifier go on. It is pretty much exactly this patchset except
> > > that you remove all the kernel vmap code. A nice thing about that
> > > is that you do not need to worry about calling set page dirty it
> > > will already be handle by the userspace VA pte. It also use less
> > > memory than when you have kernel vmap.
> > > 
> > > This idea might be defeated by security feature where the kernel is
> > > running in its own address space without the userspace address
> > > space present.
> > 
> > Like smap?
> 
> Yes like smap but also other newer changes, with similar effect, since
> the spectre drama.
> 
> Cheers,
> Jérôme

Sorry do you mean meltdown and kpti?

-- 
MST