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  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]
Date:   Fri, 11 Jun 2021 08:09:58 -0500
From:   Tyler Hicks <tyhicks@...ux.microsoft.com>
To:     Sumit Garg <sumit.garg@...aro.org>
Cc:     Jens Wiklander <jens.wiklander@...aro.org>,
        Allen Pais <apais@...ux.microsoft.com>,
        Peter Huewe <peterhuewe@....de>,
        Jarkko Sakkinen <jarkko@...nel.org>,
        Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@...pe.ca>,
        Vikas Gupta <vikas.gupta@...adcom.com>,
        Thirupathaiah Annapureddy <thiruan@...rosoft.com>,
        Pavel Tatashin <pasha.tatashin@...een.com>,
        Rafał Miłecki <zajec5@...il.com>,
        op-tee@...ts.trustedfirmware.org,
        linux-integrity <linux-integrity@...r.kernel.org>,
        bcm-kernel-feedback-list@...adcom.com, linux-mips@...r.kernel.org,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 6/8] tee: Support kernel shm registration without
 dma-buf backing

On 2021-06-11 10:46:20, Sumit Garg wrote:
> On Fri, 11 Jun 2021 at 02:39, Tyler Hicks <tyhicks@...ux.microsoft.com> wrote:
> >
> > Uncouple the registration of kernel shared memory buffers from the
> > TEE_SHM_DMA_BUF flag. Drivers may wish to allocate multi-page contiguous
> > shared memory regions but do not need them to be backed by a dma-buf
> > when the memory region is only used by the driver.
> >
> > If the TEE implementation does not require shared memory to be
> > registered, clear the flag prior to calling the corresponding pool alloc
> > function. Update the OP-TEE driver to respect TEE_SHM_REGISTER, rather
> > than TEE_SHM_DMA_BUF, when deciding whether to (un)register on
> > alloc/free operations.
> 
> > The AMD-TEE driver continues to ignore the
> > TEE_SHM_REGISTER flag.
> >
> 
> That's the main point that no other TEE implementation would honour
> TEE_SHM_REGISTER and I think it's just the incorrect usage of
> TEE_SHM_REGISTER flag to suffice OP-TEE underlying implementation.
> 
> > Allow callers of tee_shm_alloc_kernel_buf() to allocate and register a
> > shared memory region without the backing of dma-buf.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Tyler Hicks <tyhicks@...ux.microsoft.com>
> > ---
> >  drivers/tee/optee/shm_pool.c |  5 ++---
> >  drivers/tee/tee_shm.c        | 13 +++++++++++--
> >  2 files changed, 13 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
> >
> 
> This patch is just mixing two separate approaches to TEE shared
> memory. Have a look at alternative suggestions below.
> 
> > diff --git a/drivers/tee/optee/shm_pool.c b/drivers/tee/optee/shm_pool.c
> > index da06ce9b9313..6054343a29fb 100644
> > --- a/drivers/tee/optee/shm_pool.c
> > +++ b/drivers/tee/optee/shm_pool.c
> > @@ -27,7 +27,7 @@ static int pool_op_alloc(struct tee_shm_pool_mgr *poolm,
> >         shm->paddr = page_to_phys(page);
> >         shm->size = PAGE_SIZE << order;
> >
> > -       if (shm->flags & TEE_SHM_DMA_BUF) {
> > +       if (shm->flags & TEE_SHM_REGISTER) {
> 
> Here you can just do following check instead:
> 
>        if (!(shm->flags & TEE_SHM_PRIV)) {

This is a bug fix series that's intended to fix the current and older
kernels. tee_shm_alloc_anon_kernel_buf()/TEE_SHM_PRIV is not present in
older kernels and isn't required to fix these kexec/kdump bugs. Your
suggestion feels like something that should be done in the allocator
rewrite that Jens is working on to clean all of this up going forward.

Tyler

> 
> And this flag needs to be passed from the call sites here [1] [2].
> 
> [1] https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/tree/drivers/tee/optee/core.c#n280
> [2] https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/tree/drivers/tee/optee/call.c#n186
> 
> >                 unsigned int nr_pages = 1 << order, i;
> >                 struct page **pages;
> >
> > @@ -42,7 +42,6 @@ static int pool_op_alloc(struct tee_shm_pool_mgr *poolm,
> >                         page++;
> >                 }
> >
> > -               shm->flags |= TEE_SHM_REGISTER;
> 
> This should remain as it is.
> 
> >                 rc = optee_shm_register(shm->ctx, shm, pages, nr_pages,
> >                                         (unsigned long)shm->kaddr);
> >                 kfree(pages);
> > @@ -60,7 +59,7 @@ static int pool_op_alloc(struct tee_shm_pool_mgr *poolm,
> >  static void pool_op_free(struct tee_shm_pool_mgr *poolm,
> >                          struct tee_shm *shm)
> >  {
> > -       if (shm->flags & TEE_SHM_DMA_BUF)
> > +       if (shm->flags & TEE_SHM_REGISTER)
> 
> Same as above.
> 
> >                 optee_shm_unregister(shm->ctx, shm);
> >
> >         free_pages((unsigned long)shm->kaddr, get_order(shm->size));
> > diff --git a/drivers/tee/tee_shm.c b/drivers/tee/tee_shm.c
> > index c65e44707cd6..26a76f817c57 100644
> > --- a/drivers/tee/tee_shm.c
> > +++ b/drivers/tee/tee_shm.c
> > @@ -117,7 +117,7 @@ struct tee_shm *tee_shm_alloc(struct tee_context *ctx, size_t size, u32 flags)
> >                 return ERR_PTR(-EINVAL);
> >         }
> >
> > -       if ((flags & ~(TEE_SHM_MAPPED | TEE_SHM_DMA_BUF))) {
> > +       if ((flags & ~(TEE_SHM_MAPPED | TEE_SHM_DMA_BUF | TEE_SHM_REGISTER))) {
> 
> No need for this change.
> 
> >                 dev_err(teedev->dev.parent, "invalid shm flags 0x%x", flags);
> >                 return ERR_PTR(-EINVAL);
> >         }
> > @@ -137,6 +137,15 @@ struct tee_shm *tee_shm_alloc(struct tee_context *ctx, size_t size, u32 flags)
> >                 goto err_dev_put;
> >         }
> >
> > +       if (!teedev->desc->ops->shm_register ||
> > +           !teedev->desc->ops->shm_unregister) {
> > +               /* registration is not required by the TEE implementation */
> > +               flags &= ~TEE_SHM_REGISTER;
> > +       } else if (flags & TEE_SHM_DMA_BUF) {
> > +               /* all dma-buf backed shm allocations are registered */
> > +               flags |= TEE_SHM_REGISTER;
> > +       }
> > +
> 
> This change isn't required as well as underlying TEE implementation:
> OP-TEE in this case knows how to implement shared memory allocation
> whether to use reserved shared memory pool or dynamic shared memory
> pool. For more details see shared memory pool creation in
> optee_probe().
> 
> >         shm->flags = flags | TEE_SHM_POOL;
> >         shm->ctx = ctx;
> >         if (flags & TEE_SHM_DMA_BUF)
> > @@ -207,7 +216,7 @@ EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(tee_shm_alloc);
> >   */
> >  struct tee_shm *tee_shm_alloc_kernel_buf(struct tee_context *ctx, size_t size)
> >  {
> > -       return tee_shm_alloc(ctx, size, TEE_SHM_MAPPED | TEE_SHM_DMA_BUF);
> > +       return tee_shm_alloc(ctx, size, TEE_SHM_MAPPED | TEE_SHM_REGISTER);
> 
> Here it could just be:
> 
>        return tee_shm_alloc(ctx, size, TEE_SHM_MAPPED);
> 
> -Sumit
> 
> >  }
> >  EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(tee_shm_alloc_kernel_buf);
> >
> > --
> > 2.25.1
> >
> 

Powered by blists - more mailing lists