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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <d2193dbd-0d55-7315-4e76-eea7f8cc8f5b@redhat.com>
Date:   Fri, 11 Jun 2021 13:43:59 +0800
From:   Jason Wang <jasowang@...hat.com>
To:     Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@...dia.com>
Cc:     "Tian, Kevin" <kevin.tian@...el.com>,
        Lu Baolu <baolu.lu@...ux.intel.com>,
        Liu Yi L <yi.l.liu@...ux.intel.com>,
        "kvm@...r.kernel.org" <kvm@...r.kernel.org>,
        Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net>,
        "iommu@...ts.linux-foundation.org" <iommu@...ts.linux-foundation.org>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        "Alex Williamson (alex.williamson@...hat.com)\"\"" 
        <alex.williamson@...hat.com>, David Woodhouse <dwmw2@...radead.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC] /dev/ioasid uAPI proposal


在 2021/6/10 下午7:47, Jason Gunthorpe 写道:
> On Thu, Jun 10, 2021 at 10:00:01AM +0800, Jason Wang wrote:
>> 在 2021/6/8 下午9:20, Jason Gunthorpe 写道:
>>> On Tue, Jun 08, 2021 at 09:10:42AM +0800, Jason Wang wrote:
>>>
>>>> Well, this sounds like a re-invention of io_uring which has already worked
>>>> for multifds.
>>> How so? io_uring is about sending work to the kernel, not getting
>>> structued events back?
>>
>> Actually it can. Userspace can poll multiple fds via preparing multiple sqes
>> with IORING_OP_ADD flag.
> Poll is only a part of what is needed here, the main issue is
> transfering the PRI events to userspace quickly.


Do we really care e.g at most one more syscall in this case? I think the 
time spent on demand paging is much more than transferring #PF to 
userspace. What's more, a well designed vIOMMU capable IOMMU hardware 
should have the ability to inject such event directly to guest if #PF 
happens on L1.


>
>> This means another ring and we need introduce ioctl() to add or remove
>> ioasids from the poll. And it still need a kind of fallback like a list if
>> the ring is full.
> The max size of the ring should be determinable based on the PRI
> concurrance of each device and the number of devices sharing the ring


This has at least one assumption, #PF event is the only event for the 
ring, I'm not sure this is the case.

Thanks


>
> In any event, I'm not entirely convinced eliding the PRI user/kernel
> copy is the main issue here.. If we want this to be low latency I
> think it ends up with some kernel driver component assisting the
> vIOMMU emulation and avoiding the round trip to userspace
>
> Jason
>