[PATCH] x86/PCI: make all config space writes subject to XSM checking

[PATCH] x86/PCI: make all config space writes subject to XSM checking

[Jan Beulich]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1544 bytes --]

Now that we intercept them all, there's no reason not to also uniformly
hand them to XSM. Reads (which are expected to be of less interest) get
handled as before (MMCFG accesses un-audited).

Signed-off-by: Jan Beulich <jbeulich@suse.com>

--- a/xen/arch/x86/pci.c
+++ b/xen/arch/x86/pci.c
@@ -7,6 +7,7 @@
 #include <xen/spinlock.h>
 #include <xen/pci.h>
 #include <asm/io.h>
+#include <xsm/xsm.h>
 
 static DEFINE_SPINLOCK(pci_config_lock);
 
@@ -73,7 +74,12 @@ int pci_conf_write_intercept(unsigned in
                              uint32_t *data)
 {
     struct pci_dev *pdev;
-    int rc = 0;
+    int rc = xsm_pci_config_permission(XSM_HOOK, current->domain, bdf,
+                                       reg, reg + size - 1, 1);
+
+    if ( rc < 0 )
+        return rc;
+    ASSERT(!rc);
 
     /*
      * Avoid expensive operations when no hook is going to do anything
--- a/xen/arch/x86/traps.c
+++ b/xen/arch/x86/traps.c
@@ -1823,11 +1823,9 @@ static bool_t pci_cfg_ok(struct domain *
             start |= CF8_ADDR_HI(currd->arch.pci_cf8);
     }
 
-    if ( xsm_pci_config_permission(XSM_HOOK, currd, machine_bdf,
-                                   start, start + size - 1, !!write) != 0 )
-         return 0;
-
-    return !write ||
+    return !write ?
+           xsm_pci_config_permission(XSM_HOOK, currd, machine_bdf,
+                                     start, start + size - 1, 0) == 0 :
            pci_conf_write_intercept(0, machine_bdf, start, size, write) >= 0;
 }
 




[-- Attachment #2: x86-PCI-CFG-write-XSM.patch --]
[-- Type: text/plain, Size: 1603 bytes --]

x86/PCI: make all config space writes subject to XSM checking

Now that we intercept them all, there's no reason not to also uniformly
hand them to XSM. Reads (which are expected to be of less interest) get
handled as before (MMCFG accesses un-audited).

Signed-off-by: Jan Beulich <jbeulich@suse.com>

--- a/xen/arch/x86/pci.c
+++ b/xen/arch/x86/pci.c
@@ -7,6 +7,7 @@
 #include <xen/spinlock.h>
 #include <xen/pci.h>
 #include <asm/io.h>
+#include <xsm/xsm.h>
 
 static DEFINE_SPINLOCK(pci_config_lock);
 
@@ -73,7 +74,12 @@ int pci_conf_write_intercept(unsigned in
                              uint32_t *data)
 {
     struct pci_dev *pdev;
-    int rc = 0;
+    int rc = xsm_pci_config_permission(XSM_HOOK, current->domain, bdf,
+                                       reg, reg + size - 1, 1);
+
+    if ( rc < 0 )
+        return rc;
+    ASSERT(!rc);
 
     /*
      * Avoid expensive operations when no hook is going to do anything
--- a/xen/arch/x86/traps.c
+++ b/xen/arch/x86/traps.c
@@ -1823,11 +1823,9 @@ static bool_t pci_cfg_ok(struct domain *
             start |= CF8_ADDR_HI(currd->arch.pci_cf8);
     }
 
-    if ( xsm_pci_config_permission(XSM_HOOK, currd, machine_bdf,
-                                   start, start + size - 1, !!write) != 0 )
-         return 0;
-
-    return !write ||
+    return !write ?
+           xsm_pci_config_permission(XSM_HOOK, currd, machine_bdf,
+                                     start, start + size - 1, 0) == 0 :
            pci_conf_write_intercept(0, machine_bdf, start, size, write) >= 0;
 }
 

[-- Attachment #3: Type: text/plain, Size: 126 bytes --]

_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@lists.xen.org
http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel

Re: [PATCH] x86/PCI: make all config space writes subject to XSM checking

[Daniel De Graaf]

On 24/11/15 09:42, Jan Beulich wrote:
> Now that we intercept them all, there's no reason not to also uniformly
> hand them to XSM. Reads (which are expected to be of less interest) get
> handled as before (MMCFG accesses un-audited).
>
> Signed-off-by: Jan Beulich <jbeulich@suse.com>
Acked-by: Daniel De Graaf <dgdegra@tycho.nsa.gov>

Re: [PATCH] x86/PCI: make all config space writes subject to XSM checking

[Andrew Cooper]

On 24/11/15 14:42, Jan Beulich wrote:
> Now that we intercept them all, there's no reason not to also uniformly
> hand them to XSM. Reads (which are expected to be of less interest) get
> handled as before (MMCFG accesses un-audited).
>
> Signed-off-by: Jan Beulich <jbeulich@suse.com>

Acked-by: Andrew Cooper <andrew.cooper3@citrix.com>