linux-kernel - Re: [Linaro-mm-sig] [PATCH 04/18] dma-fence: prime lockdep annotations

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: <20200617152835.GF6578@ziepe.ca>
Date:   Wed, 17 Jun 2020 12:28:35 -0300
From:   Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@...pe.ca>
To:     Daniel Vetter <daniel@...ll.ch>
Cc:     Thomas Hellström (Intel) 
        <thomas_os@...pmail.org>,
        DRI Development <dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org>,
        linux-rdma <linux-rdma@...r.kernel.org>,
        Intel Graphics Development <intel-gfx@...ts.freedesktop.org>,
        Maarten Lankhorst <maarten.lankhorst@...ux.intel.com>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        amd-gfx list <amd-gfx@...ts.freedesktop.org>,
        "moderated list:DMA BUFFER SHARING FRAMEWORK" 
        <linaro-mm-sig@...ts.linaro.org>,
        Thomas Hellstrom <thomas.hellstrom@...el.com>,
        Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@...el.com>,
        "open list:DMA BUFFER SHARING FRAMEWORK" 
        <linux-media@...r.kernel.org>,
        Christian König <christian.koenig@....com>,
        Mika Kuoppala <mika.kuoppala@...el.com>
Subject: Re: [Linaro-mm-sig] [PATCH 04/18] dma-fence: prime lockdep
 annotations

On Wed, Jun 17, 2020 at 08:48:50AM +0200, Daniel Vetter wrote:

> Now my understanding for rdma is that if you don't have hw page fault
> support,

The RDMA ODP feature is restartable HW page faulting just like nouveau
has. The classical MR feature doesn't have this. Only mlx5 HW supports
ODP today.

> It's only gpus (I think) which are in this awkward in-between spot
> where dynamic memory management really is much wanted, but the hw
> kinda sucks. Aside, about 10+ years ago we had a similar problem with
> gpu hw, but for security: Many gpu didn't have any kinds of page
> tables to isolate different clients from each another. drivers/gpu
> fixed this by parsing&validating what userspace submitted to make sure
> it's only every accessing its own buffers. Most gpus have become
> reasonable nowadays and do have proper per-process pagetables (gpu
> process, not the pasid stuff), but even today there's still some of
> the old model left in some of the smallest SoC.

But I still don't understand why a dma fence is needed inside the GPU
driver itself in the notifier.

Surely the GPU driver can block and release the notifier directly from
its own command processing channel?

Why does this fence and all it entails need to leak out across
drivers?

Jason