[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20210621165230.2.Icfe7cbb2cc86a38dde0ee5ba240e0580a0ec9596@changeid>
Date: Mon, 21 Jun 2021 16:52:44 -0700
From: Douglas Anderson <dianders@...omium.org>
To: gregkh@...uxfoundation.org, rafael@...nel.org,
rafael.j.wysocki@...el.com, will@...nel.org, robin.murphy@....com,
joro@...tes.org, bjorn.andersson@...aro.org,
ulf.hansson@...aro.org, adrian.hunter@...el.com,
bhelgaas@...gle.com
Cc: robdclark@...omium.org, linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org,
linux-pci@...r.kernel.org, quic_c_gdjako@...cinc.com,
iommu@...ts.linux-foundation.org, sonnyrao@...omium.org,
saiprakash.ranjan@...eaurora.org, linux-mmc@...r.kernel.org,
vbadigan@...eaurora.org, rajatja@...gle.com, saravanak@...gle.com,
joel@...lfernandes.org, Douglas Anderson <dianders@...omium.org>,
Bartosz Golaszewski <bgolaszewski@...libre.com>,
Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@...el.com>,
Heikki Krogerus <heikki.krogerus@...ux.intel.com>,
Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@...radead.org>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: [PATCH 2/6] drivers: base: Add bits to struct device to control iommu strictness
How to control the "strictness" of an IOMMU is a bit of a mess right
now. As far as I can tell, right now:
* You can set the default to "non-strict" and some devices (right now,
only PCI devices) can request to run in "strict" mode.
* You can set the default to "strict" and no devices in the system are
allowed to run as "non-strict".
I believe this needs to be improved a bit. Specifically:
* We should be able to default to "strict" mode but let devices that
claim to be fairly low risk request that they be run in "non-strict"
mode.
* We should allow devices outside of PCIe to request "strict" mode if
the system default is "non-strict".
I believe the correct way to do this is two bits in "struct
device". One allows a device to force things to "strict" mode and the
other allows a device to _request_ "non-strict" mode. The asymmetry
here is on purpose. Generally if anything in the system makes a
request for strictness of something then we want it strict. Thus
drivers can only request (but not force) non-strictness.
It's expected that the strictness fields can be filled in by the bus
code like in the patch ("PCI: Indicate that we want to force strict
DMA for untrusted devices") or by using the new pre_probe concept
introduced in the patch ("drivers: base: Add the concept of
"pre_probe" to drivers").
Signed-off-by: Douglas Anderson <dianders@...omium.org>
---
include/linux/device.h | 11 +++++++++++
1 file changed, 11 insertions(+)
diff --git a/include/linux/device.h b/include/linux/device.h
index f1a00040fa53..c1b985e10c47 100644
--- a/include/linux/device.h
+++ b/include/linux/device.h
@@ -449,6 +449,15 @@ struct dev_links_info {
* and optionall (if the coherent mask is large enough) also
* for dma allocations. This flag is managed by the dma ops
* instance from ->dma_supported.
+ * @force_strict_iommu: If set to %true then we should force this device to
+ * iommu.strict regardless of the other defaults in the
+ * system. Only has an effect if an IOMMU is in place.
+ * @request_non_strict_iommu: If set to %true and there are no other known
+ * reasons to make the iommu.strict for this device,
+ * then default to non-strict mode. This implies
+ * some belief that the DMA master for this device
+ * won't abuse the DMA path to compromise the kernel.
+ * Only has an effect if an IOMMU is in place.
*
* At the lowest level, every device in a Linux system is represented by an
* instance of struct device. The device structure contains the information
@@ -557,6 +566,8 @@ struct device {
#ifdef CONFIG_DMA_OPS_BYPASS
bool dma_ops_bypass : 1;
#endif
+ bool force_strict_iommu:1;
+ bool request_non_strict_iommu:1;
};
/**
--
2.32.0.288.g62a8d224e6-goog
Powered by blists - more mailing lists