[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <289f5f83-adc7-4077-b4c0-c951484dd092@arm.com>
Date: Mon, 23 Oct 2023 18:22:57 +0100
From: Robin Murphy <robin.murphy@....com>
To: "Edgecombe, Rick P" <rick.p.edgecombe@...el.com>,
"Lutomirski, Andy" <luto@...nel.org>,
"linux-mm@...ck.org" <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
"dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com" <dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com>,
"thomas.lendacky@....com" <thomas.lendacky@....com>,
"Reshetova, Elena" <elena.reshetova@...el.com>,
"kirill.shutemov@...ux.intel.com" <kirill.shutemov@...ux.intel.com>,
"mingo@...hat.com" <mingo@...hat.com>,
"Christopherson,, Sean" <seanjc@...gle.com>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"tglx@...utronix.de" <tglx@...utronix.de>,
"Yamahata, Isaku" <isaku.yamahata@...el.com>,
"Cui, Dexuan" <decui@...rosoft.com>,
"mikelley@...rosoft.com" <mikelley@...rosoft.com>,
"hpa@...or.com" <hpa@...or.com>,
"peterz@...radead.org" <peterz@...radead.org>,
"bp@...en8.de" <bp@...en8.de>,
"linux-s390@...r.kernel.org" <linux-s390@...r.kernel.org>,
"sathyanarayanan.kuppuswamy@...ux.intel.com"
<sathyanarayanan.kuppuswamy@...ux.intel.com>,
"x86@...nel.org" <x86@...nel.org>
Cc: "hch@....de" <hch@....de>,
"m.szyprowski@...sung.com" <m.szyprowski@...sung.com>,
"iommu@...ts.linux.dev" <iommu@...ts.linux.dev>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 06/10] dma: Use free_decrypted_pages()
On 2023-10-23 17:46, Edgecombe, Rick P wrote:
> On Wed, 2023-10-18 at 18:42 +0100, Robin Murphy wrote:
>> On 2023-10-17 21:25, Rick Edgecombe wrote:
>>> On TDX it is possible for the untrusted host to cause
>>> set_memory_encrypted() or set_memory_decrypted() to fail such that
>>> an
>>> error is returned and the resulting memory is shared. Callers need
>>> to take
>>> care to handle these errors to avoid returning decrypted (shared)
>>> memory to
>>> the page allocator, which could lead to functional or security
>>> issues.
>>>
>>> DMA could free decrypted/shared pages if set_memory_decrypted()
>>> fails.
>>> Use the recently added free_decrypted_pages() to avoid this.
>>>
>>> Several paths also result in proper encrypted pages being freed
>>> through
>>> the same freeing function. Rely on free_decrypted_pages() to not
>>> leak the
>>> memory in these cases.
>>
>> If something's needed in the fallback path here, what about the
>> cma_release() paths?
>
> You mean inside cma_release(). If so, unfortunately I think it won't
> fit great because there are callers that are never dealing with shared
> memory (huge tlb). The reset-to-private operation does extra work that
> would be nice to avoid when possible.
>
> The cases I thought exhibited the issue were the two calls sites of
> dma_set_decrypted(). Playing around with it, I was thinking it might be
> easier to just fix those to open code leaking the pages on
> dma_set_decrypted() error. In which case it won't have the re-encrypt
> problem.
>
> It make's it less fool proof, but more efficient. And
> free_decrypted_pages() doesn't fit great anyway, as pointed out by
> Christoph.
My point is that in dma_direct_alloc(), we get some memory either
straight from the page allocator *or* from a CMA area, then call
set_memory_decrypted() on it. If the problem is that
set_memory_decrypted() can fail and require cleanup, then logically if
that cleanup is necessary for the dma_free_contiguous()->__free_pages()
call, then surely it must also be necessary for the
dma_free_contiguous()->cma_release()->free_contig_range()->__free_page()
calls.
Thanks,
Robin.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists