| 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
| ||
|
Message-ID: <1706769826.0586398-4-xuanzhuo@linux.alibaba.com>
Date: Thu, 1 Feb 2024 14:43:46 +0800
From: Xuan Zhuo <xuanzhuo@...ux.alibaba.com>
To: Jason Wang <jasowang@...hat.com>
Cc: virtualization@...ts.linux.dev,
Richard Weinberger <richard@....at>,
Anton Ivanov <anton.ivanov@...bridgegreys.com>,
Johannes Berg <johannes@...solutions.net>,
"Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@...hat.com>,
"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>,
Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>,
Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>,
Hans de Goede <hdegoede@...hat.com>,
Ilpo Järvinen <ilpo.jarvinen@...ux.intel.com>,
Vadim Pasternak <vadimp@...dia.com>,
Bjorn Andersson <andersson@...nel.org>,
Mathieu Poirier <mathieu.poirier@...aro.org>,
Cornelia Huck <cohuck@...hat.com>,
Halil Pasic <pasic@...ux.ibm.com>,
Eric Farman <farman@...ux.ibm.com>,
Heiko Carstens <hca@...ux.ibm.com>,
Vasily Gorbik <gor@...ux.ibm.com>,
Alexander Gordeev <agordeev@...ux.ibm.com>,
Christian Borntraeger <borntraeger@...ux.ibm.com>,
Sven Schnelle <svens@...ux.ibm.com>,
Alexei Starovoitov <ast@...nel.org>,
Daniel Borkmann <daniel@...earbox.net>,
Jesper Dangaard Brouer <hawk@...nel.org>,
John Fastabend <john.fastabend@...il.com>,
Benjamin Berg <benjamin.berg@...el.com>,
Yang Li <yang.lee@...ux.alibaba.com>,
linux-um@...ts.infradead.org,
netdev@...r.kernel.org,
platform-driver-x86@...r.kernel.org,
linux-remoteproc@...r.kernel.org,
linux-s390@...r.kernel.org,
kvm@...r.kernel.org,
bpf@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH vhost 04/17] virtio_ring: split: remove double check of the unmap ops
On Wed, 31 Jan 2024 17:12:22 +0800, Jason Wang <jasowang@...hat.com> wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 30, 2024 at 7:42 PM Xuan Zhuo <xuanzhuo@...ux.alibaba.com> wrote:
> >
> > In the functions vring_unmap_one_split and
> > vring_unmap_one_split_indirect,
> > multiple checks are made whether unmap is performed and whether it is
> > INDIRECT.
> >
> > These two functions are usually called in a loop, and we should put the
> > check outside the loop.
> >
> > And we unmap the descs with VRING_DESC_F_INDIRECT on the same path with
> > other descs, that make the thing more complex. If we distinguish the
> > descs with VRING_DESC_F_INDIRECT before unmap, thing will be clearer.
> >
> > 1. only one desc of the desc table is used, we do not need the loop
> > 2. the called unmap api is difference from the other desc
> > 3. the vq->premapped is not needed to check
> > 4. the vq->indirect is not needed to check
> > 5. the state->indir_desc must not be null
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Xuan Zhuo <xuanzhuo@...ux.alibaba.com>
> > ---
> > drivers/virtio/virtio_ring.c | 80 ++++++++++++++++++------------------
> > 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 41 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/virtio/virtio_ring.c b/drivers/virtio/virtio_ring.c
> > index dd03bc5a81fe..2b41fdbce975 100644
> > --- a/drivers/virtio/virtio_ring.c
> > +++ b/drivers/virtio/virtio_ring.c
> > @@ -452,9 +452,6 @@ static void vring_unmap_one_split_indirect(const struct vring_virtqueue *vq,
> > {
> > u16 flags;
> >
> > - if (!vring_need_unmap_buffer(vq))
> > - return;
> > -
> > flags = virtio16_to_cpu(vq->vq.vdev, desc->flags);
> >
> > dma_unmap_page(vring_dma_dev(vq),
> > @@ -472,27 +469,12 @@ static unsigned int vring_unmap_one_split(const struct vring_virtqueue *vq,
> >
> > flags = extra[i].flags;
> >
> > - if (flags & VRING_DESC_F_INDIRECT) {
> > - if (!vq->use_dma_api)
> > - goto out;
> > -
> > - dma_unmap_single(vring_dma_dev(vq),
> > - extra[i].addr,
> > - extra[i].len,
> > - (flags & VRING_DESC_F_WRITE) ?
> > - DMA_FROM_DEVICE : DMA_TO_DEVICE);
> > - } else {
> > - if (!vring_need_unmap_buffer(vq))
> > - goto out;
> > -
> > - dma_unmap_page(vring_dma_dev(vq),
> > - extra[i].addr,
> > - extra[i].len,
> > - (flags & VRING_DESC_F_WRITE) ?
> > - DMA_FROM_DEVICE : DMA_TO_DEVICE);
> > - }
> > + dma_unmap_page(vring_dma_dev(vq),
> > + extra[i].addr,
> > + extra[i].len,
> > + (flags & VRING_DESC_F_WRITE) ?
> > + DMA_FROM_DEVICE : DMA_TO_DEVICE);
> >
> > -out:
> > return extra[i].next;
> > }
> >
> > @@ -660,7 +642,7 @@ static inline int virtqueue_add_split(struct virtqueue *_vq,
> > vq, desc, total_sg * sizeof(struct vring_desc),
> > DMA_TO_DEVICE);
> > if (vring_mapping_error(vq, addr)) {
> > - if (vq->premapped)
> > + if (!vring_need_unmap_buffer(vq))
> > goto free_indirect;
> >
> > goto unmap_release;
> > @@ -713,6 +695,9 @@ static inline int virtqueue_add_split(struct virtqueue *_vq,
> > return 0;
> >
> > unmap_release:
> > +
> > + WARN_ON(!vring_need_unmap_buffer(vq));
> > +
> > err_idx = i;
> >
> > if (indirect)
> > @@ -774,34 +759,42 @@ static void detach_buf_split(struct vring_virtqueue *vq, unsigned int head,
> > {
> > unsigned int i, j;
> > __virtio16 nextflag = cpu_to_virtio16(vq->vq.vdev, VRING_DESC_F_NEXT);
> > + u16 flags;
> >
> > /* Clear data ptr. */
> > vq->split.desc_state[head].data = NULL;
> > + flags = vq->split.desc_extra[head].flags;
> >
> > /* Put back on free list: unmap first-level descriptors and find end */
> > i = head;
> >
> > - while (vq->split.vring.desc[i].flags & nextflag) {
> > - vring_unmap_one_split(vq, i);
> > - i = vq->split.desc_extra[i].next;
> > - vq->vq.num_free++;
> > - }
> > -
> > - vring_unmap_one_split(vq, i);
> > - vq->split.desc_extra[i].next = vq->free_head;
> > - vq->free_head = head;
> > + if (!(flags & VRING_DESC_F_INDIRECT)) {
>
> So during add we do:
>
> if (!indirect && vring_need_unmap_buffer(vq))
> vq->split.desc_extra[prev & (vq->split.vring.num - 1)].flags &=
> ~VRING_DESC_F_NEXT;
This does not affect this patch.
1. this just considers the VRING_DESC_F_NEXT of desc_extra.flags
2. the desc_extra.flags is updated by virtqueue_add_desc_split()
So for desc_extra.flags & VRING_DESC_F_INDIRECT, that is right.
Thanks.
>
> Then using flags here unconditionally seems not reliable.
>
> I post a patch to store flags unconditionally at:
>
> https://lore.kernel.org/all/20220224122655-mutt-send-email-mst@kernel.org/
>
> > + while (vq->split.vring.desc[i].flags & nextflag) {
> > + if (vring_need_unmap_buffer(vq))
> > + vring_unmap_one_split(vq, i);
> > + i = vq->split.desc_extra[i].next;
> > + vq->vq.num_free++;
> > + }
> >
> > - /* Plus final descriptor */
> > - vq->vq.num_free++;
> > + if (vring_need_unmap_buffer(vq))
> > + vring_unmap_one_split(vq, i);
> >
> > - if (vq->indirect) {
> > + if (ctx)
> > + *ctx = vq->split.desc_state[head].indir_desc;
> > + } else {
> > struct vring_desc *indir_desc =
> > vq->split.desc_state[head].indir_desc;
> > u32 len;
> >
> > - /* Free the indirect table, if any, now that it's unmapped. */
> > - if (!indir_desc)
> > - return;
> > + if (vq->use_dma_api) {
> > + struct vring_desc_extra *extra = vq->split.desc_extra;
> > +
> > + dma_unmap_single(vring_dma_dev(vq),
> > + extra[i].addr,
> > + extra[i].len,
> > + (flags & VRING_DESC_F_WRITE) ?
> > + DMA_FROM_DEVICE : DMA_TO_DEVICE);
> > + }
>
> Note that there's a following
>
> BUG_ON(!(vq->split.desc_extra[head].flags &
> VRING_DESC_F_INDIRECT));
>
> Which I think we can remove.
>
> Thanks
>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists