linux-kernel - RE: [RFC 3/3] vfio/pci: Expose PCIe PASID capability to userspace

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <BN9PR11MB52767C2D7688CE54BFB20D0B8CC1A@BN9PR11MB5276.namprd11.prod.outlook.com>
Date:   Thu, 28 Sep 2023 01:46:35 +0000
From:   "Tian, Kevin" <kevin.tian@...el.com>
To:     Alex Williamson <alex.williamson@...hat.com>
CC:     "Liu, Yi L" <yi.l.liu@...el.com>,
        "jgg@...dia.com" <jgg@...dia.com>,
        "robin.murphy@....com" <robin.murphy@....com>,
        "baolu.lu@...ux.intel.com" <baolu.lu@...ux.intel.com>,
        "joro@...tes.org" <joro@...tes.org>,
        "cohuck@...hat.com" <cohuck@...hat.com>,
        "eric.auger@...hat.com" <eric.auger@...hat.com>,
        "nicolinc@...dia.com" <nicolinc@...dia.com>,
        "kvm@...r.kernel.org" <kvm@...r.kernel.org>,
        "mjrosato@...ux.ibm.com" <mjrosato@...ux.ibm.com>,
        "chao.p.peng@...ux.intel.com" <chao.p.peng@...ux.intel.com>,
        "yi.y.sun@...ux.intel.com" <yi.y.sun@...ux.intel.com>,
        "peterx@...hat.com" <peterx@...hat.com>,
        "jasowang@...hat.com" <jasowang@...hat.com>,
        "shameerali.kolothum.thodi@...wei.com" 
        <shameerali.kolothum.thodi@...wei.com>,
        "lulu@...hat.com" <lulu@...hat.com>,
        "suravee.suthikulpanit@....com" <suravee.suthikulpanit@....com>,
        "iommu@...ts.linux.dev" <iommu@...ts.linux.dev>,
        "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        "linux-kselftest@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kselftest@...r.kernel.org>,
        "Duan, Zhenzhong" <zhenzhong.duan@...el.com>,
        "Martins, Joao" <joao.m.martins@...cle.com>
Subject: RE: [RFC 3/3] vfio/pci: Expose PCIe PASID capability to userspace

> From: Alex Williamson <alex.williamson@...hat.com>
> Sent: Thursday, September 28, 2023 2:53 AM
> 
> On Wed, 27 Sep 2023 08:07:54 +0000
> "Tian, Kevin" <kevin.tian@...el.com> wrote:
> 
> > > From: Liu, Yi L <yi.l.liu@...el.com>
> > > Sent: Tuesday, September 26, 2023 5:31 PM
> > >
> > > This exposes PCIe PASID capability to userspace and where to emulate
> this
> > > capability if wants to further expose it to VM.
> > >
> > > And this only exposes PASID capability for devices which has PCIe PASID
> > > extended struture in its configuration space. While for VFs, userspace
> > > is still unable to see this capability as SR-IOV spec forbides VF to
> > > implement PASID capability extended structure. It is a TODO in future.
> > > Related discussion can be found in below links:
> > >
> > > https://lore.kernel.org/kvm/20200407095801.648b1371@w520.home/
> > >
> https://lore.kernel.org/kvm/BL1PR11MB5271A60035EF591A5BE8AC878C01A
> > > @BL1PR11MB5271.namprd11.prod.outlook.com/
> > >
> >
> > Yes, we need a decision for VF case.
> >
> > If the consensus is to continue exposing the PASID capability in vfio-pci
> > config space by developing a kernel quirk mechanism to find offset for
> > VF, then this patch for PF is orthogonal to that VF work and can go as it is.
> >
> > But if the decision is to have a device feature for the user to enumerate
> > the vPASID capability and let the VMM take care of finding the vPASID
> > cap offset, then better we start doing that for PF too since it's not good
> > to have two enumeration interfaces for PF/VF respectively.
> 
> Note also that QEMU implements a lazy algorithm for exposing
> capabilities, the default is to expose them, so we need to consider
> existing VMs seeing a new read-only PASID capability on an assigned PF.
> 
> That might support an alternate means to expose the capability.

Yep. that's also a valid point.

> 
> > My preference is via device feature given Qemu already includes lots of
> > quirks for vfio-pci devices. Another reason is that when supporting vPASID
> > with SIOV there are some arch constraints which the driver needs to
> > report to the user to follow (e.g.  don't assign ENQCMD-capable sibling
> > vdev's to a same guest, etc.).
> 
> ?!

Sorry that I didn't plan to elaborate that tricky constraint before we show
the overall SIOV/vPASID implementation. Explaining it requires lots of
context and here just want to mention the potential requirement in case
we need more proofs to go this direction. 😊

> 
> > A device feature interface can better
> > encapsulate everything related to vPASID in one place.
> 
> Sorry if I don't remember, have you posted a proposal for the device
> feature interface?  Thanks,
> 

Not yet. Will do in next version.