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: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

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

Message-ID: <329fcd72-605a-fc10-1a8d-c3f2ac3be9a1@metux.net>
Date:   Tue, 8 Jun 2021 12:43:38 +0200
From:   "Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult" <lkml@...ux.net>
To:     Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@...dia.com>
Cc:     "Tian, Kevin" <kevin.tian@...el.com>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Joerg Roedel <joro@...tes.org>,
        Lu Baolu <baolu.lu@...ux.intel.com>,
        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>,
        David Gibson <david@...son.dropbear.id.au>,
        Kirti Wankhede <kwankhede@...dia.com>,
        Robin Murphy <robin.murphy@....com>
Subject: Re: [RFC] /dev/ioasid uAPI proposal

On 04.06.21 14:30, Jason Gunthorpe wrote:

Hi,

> Containers already needed to do this today. Container orchestration is
> hard.

Yes, but I hate to see even more work upcoming here.

> Yes, /dev/ioasid shouldn't do anything unless you have a device to
> connect it with. In this way it is probably safe to stuff it into
> every container.

Okay, if we can guarantee that, I'm completely fine.

>>> Having FDs spawn other FDs is pretty ugly, it defeats the "everything
>>> is a file" model of UNIX.
>>
>> Unfortunately, this is already defeated in many other places :(
>> (I'd even claim that ioctls already break it :p)
> 
> I think you are reaching a bit :)
> 
>> It seems your approach also breaks this, since we now need to open two
>> files in order to talk to one device.
> 
> It is two devices, thus two files.

Two separate real (hardware) devices or just two logical device nodes ?


--mtx

-- 
---
Hinweis: unverschlüsselte E-Mails können leicht abgehört und manipuliert
werden ! Für eine vertrauliche Kommunikation senden Sie bitte ihren
GPG/PGP-Schlüssel zu.
---
Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult
Free software and Linux embedded engineering
info@...ux.net -- +49-151-27565287