netdev - Re: [PATCH v3 00/14] Adding GAUDI NIC code to habanalabs driver

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]

Date:   Fri, 18 Sep 2020 15:34:54 +0300
From:   Oded Gabbay <oded.gabbay@...il.com>
To:     Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@...pe.ca>, izur@...ana.ai
Cc:     Gal Pressman <galpress@...zon.com>,
        Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>,
        "Linux-Kernel@...r. Kernel. Org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        netdev@...r.kernel.org, SW_Drivers <SW_Drivers@...ana.ai>,
        Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
        "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
        Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>,
        Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@...il.com>,
        linux-rdma@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 00/14] Adding GAUDI NIC code to habanalabs driver

On Fri, Sep 18, 2020 at 3:16 PM Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@...pe.ca> wrote:
>
> On Fri, Sep 18, 2020 at 02:59:28PM +0300, Oded Gabbay wrote:
> > On Fri, Sep 18, 2020 at 2:56 PM Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@...pe.ca> wrote:
> > >
> > > On Fri, Sep 18, 2020 at 02:36:10PM +0300, Gal Pressman wrote:
> > > > On 17/09/2020 20:18, Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
> > > > > On Tue, Sep 15, 2020 at 11:46:58PM +0300, Oded Gabbay wrote:
> > > > >> infrastructure for communication between multiple accelerators. Same
> > > > >> as Nvidia uses NVlink, we use RDMA that we have inside our ASIC.
> > > > >> The RDMA implementation we did does NOT support some basic RDMA
> > > > >> IBverbs (such as MR and PD) and therefore, we can't use the rdma-core
> > > > >> library or to connect to the rdma infrastructure in the kernel.
> > > > >
> > > > > You can't create a parallel RDMA subsystem in netdev, or in misc, and
> > > > > you can't add random device offloads as IOCTL to nedevs.
> > > > >
> > > > > RDMA is the proper home for all the networking offloads that don't fit
> > > > > into netdev.
> > > > >
> > > > > EFA was able to fit into rdma-core/etc and it isn't even RoCE at
> > > > > all. I'm sure this can too.
> > > >
> > > > Well, EFA wasn't welcomed to the RDMA subsystem with open arms ;), initially it
> > > > was suggested to go through the vfio subsystem instead.
> > > >
> > > > I think this comes back to the discussion we had when EFA was upstreamed, which
> > > > is what's the bar to get accepted to the RDMA subsystem.
> > > > IIRC, what we eventually agreed on is having a userspace rdma-core provider and
> > > > ibv_{ud,rc}_pingpong working (or just supporting one of the IB spec's QP types?).
> > >
> > > That is more or less where we ended up, yes.
> > >
> > > I'm most worried about this lack of PD and MR.
> > >
> > > Kernel must provide security for apps doing user DMA, PD and MR do
> > > this. If the device doesn't have PD/MR then it is hard to see how a WQ
> > > could ever be exposed directly to userspace, regardless of subsystem.
> >
> > Hi Jason,
> > What you say here is very true and we handle that with different
> > mechanisms. I will start working on a dedicated patch-set of the RDMA
> > code in the next few weeks with MUCH MORE details in the commit
> > messages. That will explain exactly how we expose stuff and protect.
> >
> > For example, regarding isolating between applications, we only support
> > a single application opening our file descriptor.
>
> Then the driver has a special PD create that requires the misc file
> descriptor to authorize RDMA access to the resources in that security
> context.
>
> > Another example is that the submission of WQ is done through our QMAN
> > mechanism and is NOT mapped to userspace (due to the restrictions you
> > mentioned above and other restrictions).
>
> Sure, other RDMA drivers also require a kernel ioctl for command
> execution.
>
> In this model the MR can be a software construct, again representing a
> security authorization:
>
> - A 'full process' MR, in which case the kernel command excution
>   handles dma map and pinning at command execution time
> - A 'normal' MR, in which case the DMA list is pre-created and the
>   command execution just re-uses this data
>
> The general requirement for RDMA is the same as DRM, you must provide
> enough code in rdma-core to show how the device works, and minimally
> test it. EFA uses ibv_ud_pingpong, and some pyverbs tests IIRC.
>
> So you'll want to arrange something where the default MR and PD
> mechanisms do something workable on this device, like auto-open the
> misc FD when building the PD, and support the 'normal' MR flow for
> command execution.
>
> Jason

I don't know how we can support MR because we can't support any
virtual address on the host. Our internal MMU doesn't support 64-bits.
We investigated in the past, very much wanted to use IBverbs but
didn't figure out how to make it work.
I'm adding Itay here and he can also shed more details on that.
Oded