[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CALiNf2_dV13jbHqLt-r1eK+dtOcAKBGcWQCVMQn+eL6MuOrETQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 8 Jan 2021 01:39:43 +0800
From: Claire Chang <tientzu@...omium.org>
To: Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk <konrad.wilk@...cle.com>
Cc: Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>, mpe@...erman.id.au,
benh@...nel.crashing.org, paulus@...ba.org,
"list@....net:IOMMU DRIVERS <iommu@...ts.linux-foundation.org>, Joerg
Roedel <joro@...tes.org>," <joro@...tes.org>, will@...nel.org,
Frank Rowand <frowand.list@...il.com>,
boris.ostrovsky@...cle.com, jgross@...e.com,
sstabellini@...nel.org, Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>,
Marek Szyprowski <m.szyprowski@...sung.com>,
Robin Murphy <robin.murphy@....com>, grant.likely@....com,
xypron.glpk@....de, Thierry Reding <treding@...dia.com>,
mingo@...nel.org, bauerman@...ux.ibm.com, peterz@...radead.org,
Greg KH <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
Saravana Kannan <saravanak@...gle.com>,
rafael.j.wysocki@...el.com, heikki.krogerus@...ux.intel.com,
Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com>,
rdunlap@...radead.org, dan.j.williams@...el.com,
Bartosz Golaszewski <bgolaszewski@...libre.com>,
linux-devicetree <devicetree@...r.kernel.org>,
lkml <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org,
"list@....net:IOMMU DRIVERS <iommu@...ts.linux-foundation.org>, Joerg
Roedel <joro@...tes.org>," <iommu@...ts.linux-foundation.org>,
xen-devel@...ts.xenproject.org, Tomasz Figa <tfiga@...omium.org>,
Nicolas Boichat <drinkcat@...omium.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v3 5/6] dt-bindings: of: Add restricted DMA pool
On Thu, Jan 7, 2021 at 2:58 AM Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk
<konrad.wilk@...cle.com> wrote:
>
> On Wed, Jan 06, 2021 at 11:41:23AM +0800, Claire Chang wrote:
> > Introduce the new compatible string, restricted-dma-pool, for restricted
> > DMA. One can specify the address and length of the restricted DMA memory
> > region by restricted-dma-pool in the device tree.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Claire Chang <tientzu@...omium.org>
> > ---
> > .../reserved-memory/reserved-memory.txt | 24 +++++++++++++++++++
> > 1 file changed, 24 insertions(+)
> >
> > diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/reserved-memory/reserved-memory.txt b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/reserved-memory/reserved-memory.txt
> > index e8d3096d922c..44975e2a1fd2 100644
> > --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/reserved-memory/reserved-memory.txt
> > +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/reserved-memory/reserved-memory.txt
> > @@ -51,6 +51,20 @@ compatible (optional) - standard definition
> > used as a shared pool of DMA buffers for a set of devices. It can
> > be used by an operating system to instantiate the necessary pool
> > management subsystem if necessary.
> > + - restricted-dma-pool: This indicates a region of memory meant to be
> > + used as a pool of restricted DMA buffers for a set of devices. The
> > + memory region would be the only region accessible to those devices.
> > + When using this, the no-map and reusable properties must not be set,
> > + so the operating system can create a virtual mapping that will be used
> > + for synchronization. The main purpose for restricted DMA is to
> > + mitigate the lack of DMA access control on systems without an IOMMU,
> > + which could result in the DMA accessing the system memory at
> > + unexpected times and/or unexpected addresses, possibly leading to data
> > + leakage or corruption. The feature on its own provides a basic level
> > + of protection against the DMA overwriting buffer contents at
> > + unexpected times. However, to protect against general data leakage and
> > + system memory corruption, the system needs to provide way to restrict
> > + the DMA to a predefined memory region.
>
> Heya!
>
> I think I am missing something obvious here so please bear with my
> questions:
>
> - This code adds the means of having the SWIOTLB pool tied to a specific
> memory correct?
It doesn't affect the existing SWIOTLB. It just utilizes the existing SWIOTLB
code to create another DMA pool tied to a specific memory region for a given set
of devices. It bounces the streaming DMA (map/unmap) in and out of that region
and does the memory allocation (dma_direct_alloc) from the same region.
>
>
> - Nothing stops the physical device from bypassing the SWIOTLB buffer.
> That is if an errant device screwed up the length or DMA address, the
> SWIOTLB would gladly do what the device told it do?
So the system needs to provide a way to lock down the memory access, e.g. MPU.
>
> - This has to be combined with SWIOTLB-force-ish to always use the
> bounce buffer, otherwise you could still do DMA without using
> SWIOTLB (by not hitting the criteria for needing to use SWIOTLB)?
Since restricted DMA is for the devices that are not behind an IOMMU, I change
the criteria
`if (unlikely(swiotlb_force == SWIOTLB_FORCE))`
to
`if (unlikely(swiotlb_force == SWIOTLB_FORCE) || dev->dma_io_tlb_mem)`
in dma_direct_map_page().
Also, even if SWIOTLB=force, the restricted DMA pool is preferred if available
(get_io_tlb_mem in https://lore.kernel.org/patchwork/patch/1360995/).
Thanks!
Powered by blists - more mailing lists