[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <7eb66aec-df40-4e12-8211-8a6db4ad6060@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 22 Jun 2022 13:20:30 +0300
From: Oleksandr <olekstysh@...il.com>
To: Juergen Gross <jgross@...e.com>, xen-devel@...ts.xenproject.org,
x86@...nel.org, linux-s390@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
virtualization@...ts.linux-foundation.org,
linux-arch@...r.kernel.org
Cc: Heiko Carstens <hca@...ux.ibm.com>,
Vasily Gorbik <gor@...ux.ibm.com>,
Alexander Gordeev <agordeev@...ux.ibm.com>,
Christian Borntraeger <borntraeger@...ux.ibm.com>,
Sven Schnelle <svens@...ux.ibm.com>,
Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com>,
Andy Lutomirski <luto@...nel.org>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>, Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>,
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
"Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@...hat.com>,
Jason Wang <jasowang@...hat.com>,
Stefano Stabellini <sstabellini@...nel.org>,
Oleksandr Tyshchenko <oleksandr_tyshchenko@...m.com>,
Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>,
Russell King <linux@...linux.org.uk>,
Boris Ostrovsky <boris.ostrovsky@...cle.com>,
linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 0/3] virtio: support requiring restricted access per
device
On 22.06.22 09:38, Juergen Gross wrote:
Hello Juergen
> Instead of an all or nothing approach add support for requiring
> restricted memory access per device.
>
> Changes in V3:
> - new patches 1 + 2
> - basically complete rework of patch 3
>
> Juergen Gross (3):
> virtio: replace restricted mem access flag with callback
> kernel: remove platform_has() infrastructure
> xen: don't require virtio with grants for non-PV guests
>
> MAINTAINERS | 8 --------
> arch/arm/xen/enlighten.c | 4 +++-
> arch/s390/mm/init.c | 4 ++--
> arch/x86/mm/mem_encrypt_amd.c | 4 ++--
> arch/x86/xen/enlighten_hvm.c | 4 +++-
> arch/x86/xen/enlighten_pv.c | 5 ++++-
> drivers/virtio/Kconfig | 4 ++++
> drivers/virtio/Makefile | 1 +
> drivers/virtio/virtio.c | 4 ++--
> drivers/virtio/virtio_anchor.c | 18 +++++++++++++++++
> drivers/xen/Kconfig | 9 +++++++++
> drivers/xen/grant-dma-ops.c | 10 ++++++++++
> include/asm-generic/Kbuild | 1 -
> include/asm-generic/platform-feature.h | 8 --------
> include/linux/platform-feature.h | 19 ------------------
> include/linux/virtio_anchor.h | 19 ++++++++++++++++++
> include/xen/xen-ops.h | 6 ++++++
> include/xen/xen.h | 8 --------
> kernel/Makefile | 2 +-
> kernel/platform-feature.c | 27 --------------------------
> 20 files changed, 84 insertions(+), 81 deletions(-)
> create mode 100644 drivers/virtio/virtio_anchor.c
> delete mode 100644 include/asm-generic/platform-feature.h
> delete mode 100644 include/linux/platform-feature.h
> create mode 100644 include/linux/virtio_anchor.h
> delete mode 100644 kernel/platform-feature.c
I have tested the series on Arm64 guest using Xen hypervisor and didn't
notice any issues.
I assigned two virtio-mmio devices to the guest:
#1 - grant dma device (required DT binding is present, so
xen_is_grant_dma_device() returns true), virtio-mmio modern transport
(backend offers VIRTIO_F_VERSION_1, VIRTIO_F_ACCESS_PLATFORM)
#2 - non grant dma device (required DT binding is absent, so
xen_is_grant_dma_device() returns false), virtio-mmio legacy transport
(backend does not offer these flags)
# CONFIG_XEN_VIRTIO is not set
both works, and both do not use grant mappings for virtio
CONFIG_XEN_VIRTIO=y
# CONFIG_XEN_VIRTIO_FORCE_GRANT is not set
both works, #1 uses grant mappings for virtio, #2 does not use it
CONFIG_XEN_VIRTIO=y
CONFIG_XEN_VIRTIO_FORCE_GRANT=y
only #1 works and uses grant mappings for virtio, #2 was rejected by
validation in virtio_features_ok()
You can add my:
Tested-by: Oleksandr Tyshchenko <oleksandr_tyshchenko@...m.com> # Arm64
guest using Xen
>
--
Regards,
Oleksandr Tyshchenko
Powered by blists - more mailing lists