[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20210123001410.hbcotbj2gz3iypek@intel.com>
Date: Fri, 22 Jan 2021 16:14:10 -0800
From: Ben Widawsky <ben.widawsky@...el.com>
To: Jonathan Cameron <Jonathan.Cameron@...wei.com>
Cc: linux-cxl@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-pci@...r.kernel.org,
"linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org, Ira Weiny" <ira.weiny@...el.com>,
Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@...el.com>,
Vishal Verma <vishal.l.verma@...el.com>,
"Kelley, Sean V" <sean.v.kelley@...el.com>,
Rafael Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@...el.com>,
Bjorn Helgaas <helgaas@...nel.org>,
Jon Masters <jcm@...masters.org>,
Chris Browy <cbrowy@...ry-design.com>,
Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@...radead.org>,
Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>,
daniel.lll@...baba-inc.com
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v3 15/16] cxl/mem: Add limited Get Log command (0401h)
On 21-01-14 18:08:26, Jonathan Cameron wrote:
> On Mon, 11 Jan 2021 14:51:20 -0800
> Ben Widawsky <ben.widawsky@...el.com> wrote:
>
> > The Get Log command returns the actual log entries that are advertised
> > via the Get Supported Logs command (0400h). CXL device logs are selected
> > by UUID which is part of the CXL spec. Because the driver tries to
> > sanitize what is sent to hardware, there becomes a need to restrict the
> > types of logs which can be accessed by userspace. For example, the
> > vendor specific log might only be consumable by proprietary, or offline
> > applications, and therefore a good candidate for userspace.
> >
> > The current driver infrastructure does allow basic validation for all
> > commands, but doesn't inspect any of the payload data. Along with Get
> > Log support comes new infrastructure to add a hook for payload
> > validation. This infrastructure is used to filter out the CEL UUID,
> > which the userspace driver doesn't have business knowing, and taints on
> > invalid UUIDs being sent to hardware.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Ben Widawsky <ben.widawsky@...el.com>
>
> Just a minor question for this one.
>
> Thanks, J
> ... \
> > @@ -515,6 +529,15 @@ static int handle_mailbox_cmd_from_user(struct cxl_memdev *cxlmd,
> > int rc;
> >
> > if (cmd->info.size_in) {
> > + if (cmd->validate_payload) {
> > + rc = cmd->validate_payload(u64_to_user_ptr(in_payload),
> > + cmd->info.size_in);
>
> Is it worth moving this out of the region in which we hold the mbox?
> (after fixing the bug that I think means we don't actually hold it at this point)
>
> Perhaps not, but it does feel odd to do validation under the lock.
>
>
When moving to a bounce buffer the locking resolves itself and ultimately this
doesn't happen under lock anymore.
if (cmd->info.size_in) {
if (cmd->validate_payload) {
rc = cmd->validate_payload(u64_to_user_ptr(in_payload),
cmd->info.size_in);
if (rc)
goto out;
}
mbox_cmd.payload_in = kvzalloc(cmd->info.size_in, GFP_KERNEL);
if (!mbox_cmd.payload_in) {
rc = -ENOMEM;
goto out;
}
if (copy_from_user(mbox_cmd.payload_in,
u64_to_user_ptr(in_payload),
cmd->info.size_in)) {
rc = -EFAULT;
goto out;
}
}
rc = cxl_mem_mbox_get(cxlm, true);
> > + if (rc) {
> > + cxl_mem_mbox_put(cxlmd->cxlm);
> > + return -EFAULT;
> > + }
> > + }
> > +
> > /*
> > * Directly copy the userspace payload into the hardware. UAPI
> > * states that the buffer must already be little endian.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists