[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <c9b6f236-73cd-f677-98a8-26117fb17dee@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 22 Jun 2022 18:18:26 +0300
From: Oleksandr <olekstysh@...il.com>
To: Juergen Gross <jgross@...e.com>, xen-devel@...ts.xenproject.org,
x86@...nel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Cc: Stefano Stabellini <sstabellini@...nel.org>,
Russell King <linux@...linux.org.uk>,
Boris Ostrovsky <boris.ostrovsky@...cle.com>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>, Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>,
Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com>,
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
Oleksandr Tyshchenko <oleksandr_tyshchenko@...m.com>,
linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@...aro.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 3/3] xen: don't require virtio with grants for non-PV
guests
On 22.06.22 17:35, Juergen Gross wrote:
Hello Juergen
> On 22.06.22 11:03, Oleksandr wrote:
>>
>> On 22.06.22 09:38, Juergen Gross wrote:
>>
>> Hello Juergen
>>
>>> Commit fa1f57421e0b ("xen/virtio: Enable restricted memory access using
>>> Xen grant mappings") introduced a new requirement for using virtio
>>> devices: the backend now needs to support the VIRTIO_F_ACCESS_PLATFORM
>>> feature.
>>>
>>> This is an undue requirement for non-PV guests, as those can be
>>> operated
>>> with existing backends without any problem, as long as those backends
>>> are running in dom0.
>>>
>>> Per default allow virtio devices without grant support for non-PV
>>> guests.
>>>
>>> On Arm require VIRTIO_F_ACCESS_PLATFORM for devices having been listed
>>> in the device tree to use grants.
>>>
>>> Add a new config item to always force use of grants for virtio.
>>>
>>> Fixes: fa1f57421e0b ("xen/virtio: Enable restricted memory access
>>> using Xen grant mappings")
>>> Reported-by: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@...aro.org>
>>> Signed-off-by: Juergen Gross <jgross@...e.com>
>>> ---
>>> V2:
>>> - remove command line parameter (Christoph Hellwig)
>>> V3:
>>> - rebase to callback method
>>
>>
>> Patch looks good, just one NIT ...
>>
>>
>>> ---
>>> arch/arm/xen/enlighten.c | 4 +++-
>>> arch/x86/xen/enlighten_hvm.c | 4 +++-
>>> arch/x86/xen/enlighten_pv.c | 5 ++++-
>>> drivers/xen/Kconfig | 9 +++++++++
>>> drivers/xen/grant-dma-ops.c | 10 ++++++++++
>>> include/xen/xen-ops.h | 6 ++++++
>>> include/xen/xen.h | 8 --------
>>> 7 files changed, 35 insertions(+), 11 deletions(-)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/arch/arm/xen/enlighten.c b/arch/arm/xen/enlighten.c
>>> index 1f9c3ba32833..93c8ccbf2982 100644
>>> --- a/arch/arm/xen/enlighten.c
>>> +++ b/arch/arm/xen/enlighten.c
>>> @@ -34,6 +34,7 @@
>>> #include <linux/timekeeping.h>
>>> #include <linux/timekeeper_internal.h>
>>> #include <linux/acpi.h>
>>> +#include <linux/virtio_anchor.h>
>>> #include <linux/mm.h>
>>> @@ -443,7 +444,8 @@ static int __init xen_guest_init(void)
>>> if (!xen_domain())
>>> return 0;
>>> - xen_set_restricted_virtio_memory_access();
>>> + if (IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_XEN_VIRTIO))
>>> + virtio_set_mem_acc_cb(xen_virtio_mem_acc);
>>> if (!acpi_disabled)
>>> xen_acpi_guest_init();
>>> diff --git a/arch/x86/xen/enlighten_hvm.c
>>> b/arch/x86/xen/enlighten_hvm.c
>>> index 8b71b1dd7639..28762f800596 100644
>>> --- a/arch/x86/xen/enlighten_hvm.c
>>> +++ b/arch/x86/xen/enlighten_hvm.c
>>> @@ -4,6 +4,7 @@
>>> #include <linux/cpu.h>
>>> #include <linux/kexec.h>
>>> #include <linux/memblock.h>
>>> +#include <linux/virtio_anchor.h>
>>> #include <xen/features.h>
>>> #include <xen/events.h>
>>> @@ -195,7 +196,8 @@ static void __init xen_hvm_guest_init(void)
>>> if (xen_pv_domain())
>>> return;
>>> - xen_set_restricted_virtio_memory_access();
>>> + if (IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_XEN_VIRTIO_FORCE_GRANT))
>>> + virtio_set_mem_acc_cb(virtio_require_restricted_mem_acc);
>>> init_hvm_pv_info();
>>> diff --git a/arch/x86/xen/enlighten_pv.c b/arch/x86/xen/enlighten_pv.c
>>> index e3297b15701c..5aaae8a77f55 100644
>>> --- a/arch/x86/xen/enlighten_pv.c
>>> +++ b/arch/x86/xen/enlighten_pv.c
>>> @@ -31,6 +31,7 @@
>>> #include <linux/gfp.h>
>>> #include <linux/edd.h>
>>> #include <linux/reboot.h>
>>> +#include <linux/virtio_anchor.h>
>>> #include <xen/xen.h>
>>> #include <xen/events.h>
>>> @@ -109,7 +110,9 @@ static DEFINE_PER_CPU(struct tls_descs,
>>> shadow_tls_desc);
>>> static void __init xen_pv_init_platform(void)
>>> {
>>> - xen_set_restricted_virtio_memory_access();
>>> + /* PV guests can't operate virtio devices without grants. */
>>> + if (IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_XEN_VIRTIO))
>>> + virtio_set_mem_acc_cb(virtio_require_restricted_mem_acc);
>>> populate_extra_pte(fix_to_virt(FIX_PARAVIRT_BOOTMAP));
>>> diff --git a/drivers/xen/Kconfig b/drivers/xen/Kconfig
>>> index bfd5f4f706bc..a65bd92121a5 100644
>>> --- a/drivers/xen/Kconfig
>>> +++ b/drivers/xen/Kconfig
>>> @@ -355,4 +355,13 @@ config XEN_VIRTIO
>>> If in doubt, say n.
>>> +config XEN_VIRTIO_FORCE_GRANT
>>> + bool "Require Xen virtio support to use grants"
>>> + depends on XEN_VIRTIO
>>> + help
>>> + Require virtio for Xen guests to use grant mappings.
>>> + This will avoid the need to give the backend the right to map
>>> all
>>> + of the guest memory. This will need support on the backend side
>>> + (e.g. qemu or kernel, depending on the virtio device types
>>> used).
>>> +
>>> endmenu
>>> diff --git a/drivers/xen/grant-dma-ops.c b/drivers/xen/grant-dma-ops.c
>>> index fc0142484001..8973fc1e9ccc 100644
>>> --- a/drivers/xen/grant-dma-ops.c
>>> +++ b/drivers/xen/grant-dma-ops.c
>>> @@ -12,6 +12,8 @@
>>> #include <linux/of.h>
>>> #include <linux/pfn.h>
>>> #include <linux/xarray.h>
>>> +#include <linux/virtio_anchor.h>
>>> +#include <linux/virtio.h>
>>> #include <xen/xen.h>
>>> #include <xen/xen-ops.h>
>>> #include <xen/grant_table.h>
>>> @@ -287,6 +289,14 @@ bool xen_is_grant_dma_device(struct device *dev)
>>> return has_iommu;
>>> }
>>> +bool xen_virtio_mem_acc(struct virtio_device *dev)
>>> +{
>>> + if (IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_XEN_VIRTIO_FORCE_GRANT))
>>> + return true;
>>> +
>>> + return xen_is_grant_dma_device(dev->dev.parent);
>>> +}
>>
>>
>> ... I am thinking would it be better to move this to
>> xen/xen-ops.h as grant-dma-ops.c is generic (not only for virtio,
>> although the virtio is the first use-case)
>
> I dislike using a function marked as inline in a function vector.
>
> We could add another module "xen-virtio" for this purpose, but this seems
> to be overkill.
>
> I think we should just leave it here and move it later in case more real
> virtio dependent stuff is being added.
I am happy with that explanation.
Reviewed-by: Oleksandr Tyshchenko <oleksandr_tyshchenko@...m.com>
>
>
>
> Juergen
--
Regards,
Oleksandr Tyshchenko
Powered by blists - more mailing lists