linux-kernel - RE: [PATCH v7 09/11] iommu/vt-d: Add bind guest PASID support

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: <AADFC41AFE54684AB9EE6CBC0274A5D19D5DE3D3@SHSMSX104.ccr.corp.intel.com>
Date:   Tue, 29 Oct 2019 07:57:21 +0000
From:   "Tian, Kevin" <kevin.tian@...el.com>
To:     Jacob Pan <jacob.jun.pan@...ux.intel.com>
CC:     "iommu@...ts.linux-foundation.org" <iommu@...ts.linux-foundation.org>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Joerg Roedel <joro@...tes.org>,
        "David Woodhouse" <dwmw2@...radead.org>,
        Alex Williamson <alex.williamson@...hat.com>,
        Jean-Philippe Brucker <jean-philippe@...aro.com>,
        "Liu, Yi L" <yi.l.liu@...el.com>,
        "Raj, Ashok" <ashok.raj@...el.com>,
        Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>,
        Lu Baolu <baolu.lu@...ux.intel.com>,
        Jonathan Cameron <jic23@...nel.org>,
        Eric Auger <eric.auger@...hat.com>
Subject: RE: [PATCH v7 09/11] iommu/vt-d: Add bind guest PASID support

> From: Jacob Pan [mailto:jacob.jun.pan@...ux.intel.com]
> Sent: Tuesday, October 29, 2019 12:03 AM
> 
> On Mon, 28 Oct 2019 06:03:36 +0000
> "Tian, Kevin" <kevin.tian@...el.com> wrote:
> 
> > > > > +	.sva_bind_gpasid	= intel_svm_bind_gpasid,
> > > > > +	.sva_unbind_gpasid	= intel_svm_unbind_gpasid,
> > > > > +#endif
> > > >
> > > > again, pure PASID management logic should be separated from SVM.
> > > >
> > > I am not following, these two functions are SVM functionality, not
> > > pure PASID management which is already separated in ioasid.c
> >
> > I should say pure "scalable mode" logic. Above callbacks are not
> > related to host SVM per se. They are serving gpasid requests from
> > guest side, thus part of generic scalable mode capability.
> Got your point, but we are sharing data structures with host SVM, it is
> very difficult and inefficient to separate the two.

I don't think difficulty is the reason against such direction. We need 
do things right. :-) I'm fine with putting it in a TODO list, but at least
need the right information in the 1st place to tell that current way
is just a short-term approach, and we should revisit later.

thanks
Kevin