linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH V2 3/7] vhost-vdpa: VHOST_NEW

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: <CACGkMEtL7Fkj+srq+beK8UBZ5QDowpz+hT2HZ8RZR00UsRJcVA@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 16 Jul 2024 13:16:59 +0800
From: Jason Wang <jasowang@...hat.com>
To: Steven Sistare <steven.sistare@...cle.com>
Cc: virtualization@...ts.linux-foundation.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, 
	"Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@...hat.com>, Si-Wei Liu <si-wei.liu@...cle.com>, 
	Eugenio Perez Martin <eperezma@...hat.com>, Xuan Zhuo <xuanzhuo@...ux.alibaba.com>, 
	Dragos Tatulea <dtatulea@...dia.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH V2 3/7] vhost-vdpa: VHOST_NEW_OWNER

On Mon, Jul 15, 2024 at 10:27 PM Steven Sistare
<steven.sistare@...cle.com> wrote:
>
> On 7/14/2024 10:26 PM, Jason Wang wrote:
> > On Fri, Jul 12, 2024 at 9:19 PM Steve Sistare <steven.sistare@...cle.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> Add an ioctl to transfer file descriptor ownership and pinned memory
> >> accounting from one process to another.
> >>
> >> This is more efficient than VHOST_RESET_OWNER followed by VHOST_SET_OWNER,
> >> as that would unpin all physical pages, requiring them to be repinned in
> >> the new process.  That would cost multiple seconds for large memories, and
> >> be incurred during a virtual machine's pause time during live update.
> >>
> >> Signed-off-by: Steve Sistare <steven.sistare@...cle.com>
> >> ---
> >>   drivers/vhost/vdpa.c       | 41 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> >>   drivers/vhost/vhost.c      | 15 ++++++++++++++
> >>   drivers/vhost/vhost.h      |  1 +
> >>   include/uapi/linux/vhost.h | 10 ++++++++++
> >>   4 files changed, 67 insertions(+)
> >>
> >> diff --git a/drivers/vhost/vdpa.c b/drivers/vhost/vdpa.c
> >> index b49e5831b3f0..5cf55ca4ec02 100644
> >> --- a/drivers/vhost/vdpa.c
> >> +++ b/drivers/vhost/vdpa.c
> >> @@ -632,6 +632,44 @@ static long vhost_vdpa_resume(struct vhost_vdpa *v)
> >>          return ret;
> >>   }
> >>
> >> +static long vhost_vdpa_new_owner(struct vhost_vdpa *v)
> >> +{
> >> +       int r;
> >> +       struct vhost_dev *vdev = &v->vdev;
> >> +       struct mm_struct *mm_old = vdev->mm;
> >> +       struct mm_struct *mm_new = current->mm;
> >> +       long pinned_vm = v->pinned_vm;
> >> +       unsigned long lock_limit = PFN_DOWN(rlimit(RLIMIT_MEMLOCK));
> >> +
> >> +       if (!mm_old)
> >> +               return -EINVAL;
> >> +       mmgrab(mm_old);
> >> +
> >> +       if (!v->vdpa->use_va &&
> >> +           pinned_vm + atomic64_read(&mm_new->pinned_vm) > lock_limit) {
> >> +               r = -ENOMEM;
> >> +               goto out;
> >> +       }
> >
> > So this seems to allow an arbitrary process to execute this. Seems to be unsafe.
> >
> > I wonder if we need to add some checks here, maybe PID or other stuff
> > to only allow the owner process to do this.
>
> The original owner must send the file descriptor to the new owner.

This seems not to be in the steps you put in the cover letter.

> That constitutes permission to take ownership.

This seems like a relaxed version of the reset_owner:

Currently, reset_owner have the following check:

/* Caller should have device mutex */
long vhost_dev_check_owner(struct vhost_dev *dev)
{
        /* Are you the owner? If not, I don't think you mean to do that */
        return dev->mm == current->mm ? 0 : -EPERM;
}
EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(vhost_dev_check_owner);

It means even if the fd is passed to some other process, the reset
owner won't work there.

Thanks

>
> >> +       r = vhost_vdpa_bind_mm(v, mm_new);
> >> +       if (r)
> >> +               goto out;
> >> +
> >> +       r = vhost_dev_new_owner(vdev);
> >> +       if (r) {
> >> +               vhost_vdpa_bind_mm(v, mm_old);
> >> +               goto out;
> >> +       }
> >> +
> >> +       if (!v->vdpa->use_va) {
> >> +               atomic64_sub(pinned_vm, &mm_old->pinned_vm);
> >> +               atomic64_add(pinned_vm, &mm_new->pinned_vm);
> >> +       }
> >> +
> >> +out:
> >> +       mmdrop(mm_old);
> >> +       return r;
> >> +}
> >> +
> >>   static long vhost_vdpa_vring_ioctl(struct vhost_vdpa *v, unsigned int cmd,
> >>                                     void __user *argp)
> >>   {
> >> @@ -876,6 +914,9 @@ static long vhost_vdpa_unlocked_ioctl(struct file *filep,
> >>          case VHOST_VDPA_RESUME:
> >>                  r = vhost_vdpa_resume(v);
> >>                  break;
> >> +       case VHOST_NEW_OWNER:
> >> +               r = vhost_vdpa_new_owner(v);
> >> +               break;
> >>          default:
> >>                  r = vhost_dev_ioctl(&v->vdev, cmd, argp);
> >>                  if (r == -ENOIOCTLCMD)
> >> diff --git a/drivers/vhost/vhost.c b/drivers/vhost/vhost.c
> >> index b60955682474..ab40ae50552f 100644
> >> --- a/drivers/vhost/vhost.c
> >> +++ b/drivers/vhost/vhost.c
> >> @@ -963,6 +963,21 @@ long vhost_dev_set_owner(struct vhost_dev *dev)
> >>   }
> >>   EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(vhost_dev_set_owner);
> >>
> >> +/* Caller should have device mutex */
> >> +long vhost_dev_new_owner(struct vhost_dev *dev)
> >> +{
> >> +       if (dev->mm == current->mm)
> >> +               return -EBUSY;
> >> +
> >> +       if (!vhost_dev_has_owner(dev))
> >> +               return -EINVAL;
> >> +
> >> +       vhost_detach_mm(dev);
> >> +       vhost_attach_mm(dev);
> >
> > This seems to do nothing unless I miss something.
>
> vhost_detach mm drops dev->mm.
> vhost_attach_mm grabs current->mm.
>
> - Steve
>