linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v8 12/14] iommu/arm-smmu-v3: Introduce struct arm_smmu

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: <Z9huquCf7YuzIjqx@Asurada-Nvidia>
Date: Mon, 17 Mar 2025 11:49:14 -0700
From: Nicolin Chen <nicolinc@...dia.com>
To: Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@...dia.com>
CC: Will Deacon <will@...nel.org>, <kevin.tian@...el.com>, <corbet@....net>,
	<joro@...tes.org>, <suravee.suthikulpanit@....com>, <robin.murphy@....com>,
	<dwmw2@...radead.org>, <baolu.lu@...ux.intel.com>,
	<linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, <iommu@...ts.linux.dev>,
	<linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>, <linux-kselftest@...r.kernel.org>,
	<linux-doc@...r.kernel.org>, <eric.auger@...hat.com>,
	<jean-philippe@...aro.org>, <mdf@...nel.org>, <mshavit@...gle.com>,
	<shameerali.kolothum.thodi@...wei.com>, <smostafa@...gle.com>,
	<ddutile@...hat.com>, <yi.l.liu@...el.com>, <praan@...gle.com>,
	<patches@...ts.linux.dev>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v8 12/14] iommu/arm-smmu-v3: Introduce struct
 arm_smmu_vmaster

On Mon, Mar 17, 2025 at 12:44:23PM -0300, Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 11, 2025 at 10:43:08AM -0700, Nicolin Chen wrote:
> > > > +int arm_smmu_attach_prepare_vmaster(struct arm_smmu_attach_state *state,
> > > > +				    struct arm_smmu_nested_domain *nested_domain)
> > > > +{
> > > > +	struct arm_smmu_vmaster *vmaster;
> > > > +	unsigned long vsid;
> > > > +	int ret;
> > > > +
> > > > +	iommu_group_mutex_assert(state->master->dev);
> > > > +
> > > > +	/* Skip invalid vSTE */
> > > > +	if (!(nested_domain->ste[0] & cpu_to_le64(STRTAB_STE_0_V)))
> > > > +		return 0;
> > > 
> > > Ok, and we don't need to set 'state->vmaster' in this case because we
> > > only report stage-1 faults back to the vSMMU?
> > 
> > This is a good question that I didn't ask myself hard enough..
> > 
> > I think we should probably drop it. An invalid STE should trigger
> > a C_BAD_STE event that is in the supported vEVENT list. I'll run
> > some test before removing this line from v9.
> 
> It won't trigger C_BAD_STE, recall Robin was opposed to thatm so we have this:
> 
> static void arm_smmu_make_nested_domain_ste(
> 	struct arm_smmu_ste *target, struct arm_smmu_master *master,
> 	struct arm_smmu_nested_domain *nested_domain, bool ats_enabled)
> {
> 	unsigned int cfg =
> 		FIELD_GET(STRTAB_STE_0_CFG, le64_to_cpu(nested_domain->ste[0]));
> 
> 	/*
> 	 * Userspace can request a non-valid STE through the nesting interface.
> 	 * We relay that into an abort physical STE with the intention that
> 	 * C_BAD_STE for this SID can be generated to userspace.
> 	 */
> 	if (!(nested_domain->ste[0] & cpu_to_le64(STRTAB_STE_0_V)))
> 		cfg = STRTAB_STE_0_CFG_ABORT;
> 
> So, in the case of a non-valid STE, and a device access, the HW will
> generate one of the translation faults and that will be forwarded.
> 
> Some software component will have to transform those fault events into
> C_BAD_STE for the VM.

Hmm, double checked the spec. It does say that C_BAD_STE would be
triggered:

" V, bit [0] STE Valid.
  [...]
  Device transactions that select an STE with this field configured
  to 0 are terminated with an abort reported back to the device and
  a C_BAD_STE event is recorded."

I also did a hack test unsetting the V bit in the kernel. Then, the
HW did report C_BAD_STE (0x4) back to the VM (via vEVENTQ).

Thanks
Nicolin