linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v4 05/11] iommu/sva: Assign a PASID to mm on PASID allocation and free it on mm exit

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: <8b1e40c9-b2e8-7b73-d9ad-2c6a5a167370@intel.com>
Date:   Tue, 12 Apr 2022 08:35:56 -0700
From:   Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...el.com>
To:     Jean-Philippe Brucker <jean-philippe@...aro.org>
Cc:     "zhangfei.gao@...mail.com" <zhangfei.gao@...mail.com>,
        Joerg Roedel <joro@...tes.org>,
        Fenghua Yu <fenghua.yu@...el.com>,
        Ravi V Shankar <ravi.v.shankar@...el.com>,
        Tony Luck <tony.luck@...el.com>,
        Ashok Raj <ashok.raj@...el.com>,
        Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
        Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com>,
        x86 <x86@...nel.org>,
        linux-kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        iommu <iommu@...ts.linux-foundation.org>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>, Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>,
        Andy Lutomirski <luto@...nel.org>,
        Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@...hat.com>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 05/11] iommu/sva: Assign a PASID to mm on PASID
 allocation and free it on mm exit

On 4/12/22 08:10, Jean-Philippe Brucker wrote:
>> I wonder if the Intel and ARM IOMMU code differ in the way they keep
>> references to the mm, or if this affects Intel as well, but we just
>> haven't tested the code enough.
> The Arm code was written expecting the PASID to be freed on unbind(), not
> mm exit. I missed the change of behavior, sorry (I thought your plan was
> to extend PASID lifetime, not shorten it?) but as is it seems very broken.
> For example in the iommu_sva_unbind_device(), we have
> arm_smmu_mmu_notifier_put() clearing the PASID table entry for
> "mm->pasid", which is going to end badly if the PASID has been cleared or
> reallocated. We can't clear the PASID entry in mm exit because at that
> point the device may still be issuing DMA for that PASID and we need to
> quiesce the entry rather than deactivate it.

I think we ended up flipping some of this around on the Intel side.
Instead of having to quiesce the device on mm exit, we don't let the mm
exit until the device is done.

When you program the pasid into the device, it's a lot like when you
create a thread.  We bump the reference count on the mm when we program
the page table pointer into a CPU.  We drop the thread's reference to
the mm when the thread exits and will no longer be using the page tables.

Same thing with pasids.  We bump the refcount on the mm when the pasid
is programmed into the device.  Once the device is done with the mm, we
drop the mm.

Basically, instead of recounting the pasid itself, we just refcount the mm.