linux-kernel - Re: [RFC] /dev/ioasid uAPI proposal

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Thu, 3 Jun 2021 14:50:11 +0800
From:   Lu Baolu <baolu.lu@...ux.intel.com>
To:     David Gibson <david@...son.dropbear.id.au>
Cc:     baolu.lu@...ux.intel.com, Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@...dia.com>,
        "Tian, Kevin" <kevin.tian@...el.com>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Joerg Roedel <joro@...tes.org>,
        David Woodhouse <dwmw2@...radead.org>,
        "iommu@...ts.linux-foundation.org" <iommu@...ts.linux-foundation.org>,
        "kvm@...r.kernel.org" <kvm@...r.kernel.org>,
        "Alex Williamson (alex.williamson@...hat.com)" 
        <alex.williamson@...hat.com>, Jason Wang <jasowang@...hat.com>,
        Eric Auger <eric.auger@...hat.com>,
        Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net>,
        "Raj, Ashok" <ashok.raj@...el.com>,
        "Liu, Yi L" <yi.l.liu@...el.com>, "Wu, Hao" <hao.wu@...el.com>,
        "Jiang, Dave" <dave.jiang@...el.com>,
        Jacob Pan <jacob.jun.pan@...ux.intel.com>,
        Jean-Philippe Brucker <jean-philippe@...aro.org>,
        Kirti Wankhede <kwankhede@...dia.com>,
        Robin Murphy <robin.murphy@....com>
Subject: Re: [RFC] /dev/ioasid uAPI proposal

Hi David,

On 6/3/21 1:54 PM, David Gibson wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 01, 2021 at 07:09:21PM +0800, Lu Baolu wrote:
>> Hi Jason,
>>
>> On 2021/5/29 7:36, Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
>>>> /*
>>>>     * Bind an user-managed I/O page table with the IOMMU
>>>>     *
>>>>     * Because user page table is untrusted, IOASID nesting must be enabled
>>>>     * for this ioasid so the kernel can enforce its DMA isolation policy
>>>>     * through the parent ioasid.
>>>>     *
>>>>     * Pgtable binding protocol is different from DMA mapping. The latter
>>>>     * has the I/O page table constructed by the kernel and updated
>>>>     * according to user MAP/UNMAP commands. With pgtable binding the
>>>>     * whole page table is created and updated by userspace, thus different
>>>>     * set of commands are required (bind, iotlb invalidation, page fault, etc.).
>>>>     *
>>>>     * Because the page table is directly walked by the IOMMU, the user
>>>>     * must  use a format compatible to the underlying hardware. It can
>>>>     * check the format information through IOASID_GET_INFO.
>>>>     *
>>>>     * The page table is bound to the IOMMU according to the routing
>>>>     * information of each attached device under the specified IOASID. The
>>>>     * routing information (RID and optional PASID) is registered when a
>>>>     * device is attached to this IOASID through VFIO uAPI.
>>>>     *
>>>>     * Input parameters:
>>>>     *	- child_ioasid;
>>>>     *	- address of the user page table;
>>>>     *	- formats (vendor, address_width, etc.);
>>>>     *
>>>>     * Return: 0 on success, -errno on failure.
>>>>     */
>>>> #define IOASID_BIND_PGTABLE		_IO(IOASID_TYPE, IOASID_BASE + 9)
>>>> #define IOASID_UNBIND_PGTABLE	_IO(IOASID_TYPE, IOASID_BASE + 10)
>>> Also feels backwards, why wouldn't we specify this, and the required
>>> page table format, during alloc time?
>>>
>> Thinking of the required page table format, perhaps we should shed more
>> light on the page table of an IOASID. So far, an IOASID might represent
>> one of the following page tables (might be more):
>>
>>   1) an IOMMU format page table (a.k.a. iommu_domain)
>>   2) a user application CPU page table (SVA for example)
>>   3) a KVM EPT (future option)
>>   4) a VM guest managed page table (nesting mode)
>>
>> This version only covers 1) and 4). Do you think we need to support 2),
> Isn't (2) the equivalent of using the using the host-managed pagetable
> then doing a giant MAP of all your user address space into it?  But
> maybe we should identify that case explicitly in case the host can
> optimize it.
> 

Conceptually, yes. Current SVA implementation just reuses the
application's cpu page table w/o map/unmap operations.

Best regards,
baolu