All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Vincent Donnefort via OP-TEE <op-tee@lists.trustedfirmware.org>
To: Sebastian Ene <sebastianene@google.com>
Cc: catalin.marinas@arm.com, oupton@kernel.org,
	sudeep.holla@kernel.org, will@kernel.org, joey.gouly@arm.com,
	kvmarm@lists.linux.dev, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, android-kvm@google.com,
	maz@kernel.org, mrigendra.chaubey@gmail.com,
	op-tee@lists.trustedfirmware.org, perlarsen@google.com,
	seiden@linux.ibm.com, smostafa@google.com, sumit.garg@kernel.org,
	suzuki.poulose@arm.com, yuzenghui@huawei.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v7 5/7] KVM: arm64: Validate the offset to the mem access descriptor
Date: Thu, 18 Jun 2026 17:56:24 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <ajQjOH9Cjk1UqdT-@google.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20260617145130.3729015-6-sebastianene@google.com>

On Wed, Jun 17, 2026 at 02:51:28PM +0000, Sebastian Ene wrote:
> Prevent the pKVM hypervisor from making assumptions that the
> endpoint memory access descriptor (EMAD) comes right after the
> FF-A memory region header.
> Prior to FF-A version 1.1 the header of the memory region
> didn't contain an offset to the endpoint memory access descriptor.
> The layout of a memory transaction looks like this from 1.1 onward:
> Type | Field name | Offset
> [ Header | ffa_mem_region  | 0
>   EMAD 1 | ffa_mem_region_attributes) | ffa_mem_region.ep_mem_offset
> ]
> Verify that the offset to the first endpoint memory access descriptor
> is within the mailbox buffer bounds.
> 
> Also, fix one hardcoded sizeof(struct ffa_mem_region_attributes) that
> should be replaced ffa_emad_size_get() for compatibility with FFA v1.0.
> 
> Fixes: 42fb33dde42b ("KVM: arm64: Use FF-A 1.1 with pKVM")
> Signed-off-by: Sebastian Ene <sebastianene@google.com>
> Signed-off-by: Mostafa Saleh <smostafa@google.com>
> ---
>  arch/arm64/kvm/hyp/nvhe/ffa.c | 29 +++++++++++++++++++++--------
>  1 file changed, 21 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/arch/arm64/kvm/hyp/nvhe/ffa.c b/arch/arm64/kvm/hyp/nvhe/ffa.c
> index 2d211661952e..1a2abd0154c6 100644
> --- a/arch/arm64/kvm/hyp/nvhe/ffa.c
> +++ b/arch/arm64/kvm/hyp/nvhe/ffa.c
> @@ -476,11 +476,14 @@ static void __do_ffa_mem_xfer(const u64 func_id,
>  	DECLARE_REG(u32, fraglen, ctxt, 2);
>  	DECLARE_REG(u64, addr_mbz, ctxt, 3);
>  	DECLARE_REG(u32, npages_mbz, ctxt, 4);
> +	u32 offset, nr_ranges, checked_offset, em_mem_access_off;
>  	struct ffa_mem_region_attributes *ep_mem_access;
>  	struct ffa_composite_mem_region *reg;
>  	struct ffa_mem_region *buf;
> -	u32 offset, nr_ranges, checked_offset;
>  	int ret = 0;
> +	size_t mem_region_len = !FFA_MEM_REGION_HAS_EP_MEM_OFFSET(hyp_ffa_version) ?
> +		offsetof(struct ffa_mem_region, ep_mem_offset) :
> +		sizeof(struct ffa_mem_region);
>  
>  	if (addr_mbz || npages_mbz || fraglen > len ||
>  	    fraglen > KVM_FFA_MBOX_NR_PAGES * PAGE_SIZE) {
> @@ -488,8 +491,7 @@ static void __do_ffa_mem_xfer(const u64 func_id,
>  		goto out;
>  	}
>  
> -	if (fraglen < sizeof(struct ffa_mem_region) +
> -		      sizeof(struct ffa_mem_region_attributes)) {
> +	if (fraglen < mem_region_len + ffa_emad_size_get(hyp_ffa_version)) {

Can't we replace mem_region_len with ffa_mem_desc_offset()? that pretty much
looks like the same thing.


>  		ret = FFA_RET_INVALID_PARAMETERS;
>  		goto out;
>  	}
> @@ -508,8 +510,13 @@ static void __do_ffa_mem_xfer(const u64 func_id,
>  	buf = hyp_buffers.tx;
>  	memcpy(buf, host_buffers.tx, fraglen);
>  
> -	ep_mem_access = (void *)buf +
> -			ffa_mem_desc_offset(buf, 0, hyp_ffa_version);
> +	em_mem_access_off = ffa_mem_desc_offset(buf, 0, hyp_ffa_version);
> +	if ((u64)em_mem_access_off + ffa_emad_size_get(hyp_ffa_version) > fraglen) {

This check looks like ffa_mem_desc_offset() with count to 1.


> +		ret = FFA_RET_INVALID_PARAMETERS;
> +		goto out_unlock;
> +	}
> +
> +	ep_mem_access = (void *)buf + em_mem_access_off;
>  	offset = ep_mem_access->composite_off;
>  	if (!offset || buf->ep_count != 1 || buf->sender_id != HOST_FFA_ID) {
>  		ret = FFA_RET_INVALID_PARAMETERS;
> @@ -574,9 +581,9 @@ static void do_ffa_mem_reclaim(struct arm_smccc_1_2_regs *res,
>  	DECLARE_REG(u32, handle_lo, ctxt, 1);
>  	DECLARE_REG(u32, handle_hi, ctxt, 2);
>  	DECLARE_REG(u32, flags, ctxt, 3);
> +	u32 offset, len, fraglen, fragoff, em_mem_access_off;
>  	struct ffa_mem_region_attributes *ep_mem_access;
>  	struct ffa_composite_mem_region *reg;
> -	u32 offset, len, fraglen, fragoff;
>  	struct ffa_mem_region *buf;
>  	int ret = 0;
>  	u64 handle;
> @@ -599,8 +606,14 @@ static void do_ffa_mem_reclaim(struct arm_smccc_1_2_regs *res,
>  	len = res->a1;
>  	fraglen = res->a2;
>  
> -	ep_mem_access = (void *)buf +
> -			ffa_mem_desc_offset(buf, 0, hyp_ffa_version);
> +	em_mem_access_off = ffa_mem_desc_offset(buf, 0, hyp_ffa_version);
> +	if ((u64)em_mem_access_off + ffa_emad_size_get(hyp_ffa_version) > fraglen) {

ditto. ffa_mem_desc_offset()

> +		ret = FFA_RET_INVALID_PARAMETERS;
> +		ffa_rx_release(res);
> +		goto out_unlock;
> +	}
> +
> +	ep_mem_access = (void *)buf + em_mem_access_off;
>  	offset = ep_mem_access->composite_off;
>  	/*
>  	 * We can trust the SPMD to get this right, but let's at least
> -- 
> 2.54.0.1136.gdb2ca164c4-goog
> 

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Vincent Donnefort <vdonnefort@google.com>
To: Sebastian Ene <sebastianene@google.com>
Cc: catalin.marinas@arm.com, oupton@kernel.org,
	sudeep.holla@kernel.org, will@kernel.org,
	jens.wiklander@linaro.org, joey.gouly@arm.com,
	kvmarm@lists.linux.dev, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, android-kvm@google.com,
	maz@kernel.org, mrigendra.chaubey@gmail.com,
	op-tee@lists.trustedfirmware.org, perlarsen@google.com,
	seiden@linux.ibm.com, smostafa@google.com, sumit.garg@kernel.org,
	suzuki.poulose@arm.com, yuzenghui@huawei.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v7 5/7] KVM: arm64: Validate the offset to the mem access descriptor
Date: Thu, 18 Jun 2026 17:56:24 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <ajQjOH9Cjk1UqdT-@google.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20260617145130.3729015-6-sebastianene@google.com>

On Wed, Jun 17, 2026 at 02:51:28PM +0000, Sebastian Ene wrote:
> Prevent the pKVM hypervisor from making assumptions that the
> endpoint memory access descriptor (EMAD) comes right after the
> FF-A memory region header.
> Prior to FF-A version 1.1 the header of the memory region
> didn't contain an offset to the endpoint memory access descriptor.
> The layout of a memory transaction looks like this from 1.1 onward:
> Type | Field name | Offset
> [ Header | ffa_mem_region  | 0
>   EMAD 1 | ffa_mem_region_attributes) | ffa_mem_region.ep_mem_offset
> ]
> Verify that the offset to the first endpoint memory access descriptor
> is within the mailbox buffer bounds.
> 
> Also, fix one hardcoded sizeof(struct ffa_mem_region_attributes) that
> should be replaced ffa_emad_size_get() for compatibility with FFA v1.0.
> 
> Fixes: 42fb33dde42b ("KVM: arm64: Use FF-A 1.1 with pKVM")
> Signed-off-by: Sebastian Ene <sebastianene@google.com>
> Signed-off-by: Mostafa Saleh <smostafa@google.com>
> ---
>  arch/arm64/kvm/hyp/nvhe/ffa.c | 29 +++++++++++++++++++++--------
>  1 file changed, 21 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/arch/arm64/kvm/hyp/nvhe/ffa.c b/arch/arm64/kvm/hyp/nvhe/ffa.c
> index 2d211661952e..1a2abd0154c6 100644
> --- a/arch/arm64/kvm/hyp/nvhe/ffa.c
> +++ b/arch/arm64/kvm/hyp/nvhe/ffa.c
> @@ -476,11 +476,14 @@ static void __do_ffa_mem_xfer(const u64 func_id,
>  	DECLARE_REG(u32, fraglen, ctxt, 2);
>  	DECLARE_REG(u64, addr_mbz, ctxt, 3);
>  	DECLARE_REG(u32, npages_mbz, ctxt, 4);
> +	u32 offset, nr_ranges, checked_offset, em_mem_access_off;
>  	struct ffa_mem_region_attributes *ep_mem_access;
>  	struct ffa_composite_mem_region *reg;
>  	struct ffa_mem_region *buf;
> -	u32 offset, nr_ranges, checked_offset;
>  	int ret = 0;
> +	size_t mem_region_len = !FFA_MEM_REGION_HAS_EP_MEM_OFFSET(hyp_ffa_version) ?
> +		offsetof(struct ffa_mem_region, ep_mem_offset) :
> +		sizeof(struct ffa_mem_region);
>  
>  	if (addr_mbz || npages_mbz || fraglen > len ||
>  	    fraglen > KVM_FFA_MBOX_NR_PAGES * PAGE_SIZE) {
> @@ -488,8 +491,7 @@ static void __do_ffa_mem_xfer(const u64 func_id,
>  		goto out;
>  	}
>  
> -	if (fraglen < sizeof(struct ffa_mem_region) +
> -		      sizeof(struct ffa_mem_region_attributes)) {
> +	if (fraglen < mem_region_len + ffa_emad_size_get(hyp_ffa_version)) {

Can't we replace mem_region_len with ffa_mem_desc_offset()? that pretty much
looks like the same thing.


>  		ret = FFA_RET_INVALID_PARAMETERS;
>  		goto out;
>  	}
> @@ -508,8 +510,13 @@ static void __do_ffa_mem_xfer(const u64 func_id,
>  	buf = hyp_buffers.tx;
>  	memcpy(buf, host_buffers.tx, fraglen);
>  
> -	ep_mem_access = (void *)buf +
> -			ffa_mem_desc_offset(buf, 0, hyp_ffa_version);
> +	em_mem_access_off = ffa_mem_desc_offset(buf, 0, hyp_ffa_version);
> +	if ((u64)em_mem_access_off + ffa_emad_size_get(hyp_ffa_version) > fraglen) {

This check looks like ffa_mem_desc_offset() with count to 1.


> +		ret = FFA_RET_INVALID_PARAMETERS;
> +		goto out_unlock;
> +	}
> +
> +	ep_mem_access = (void *)buf + em_mem_access_off;
>  	offset = ep_mem_access->composite_off;
>  	if (!offset || buf->ep_count != 1 || buf->sender_id != HOST_FFA_ID) {
>  		ret = FFA_RET_INVALID_PARAMETERS;
> @@ -574,9 +581,9 @@ static void do_ffa_mem_reclaim(struct arm_smccc_1_2_regs *res,
>  	DECLARE_REG(u32, handle_lo, ctxt, 1);
>  	DECLARE_REG(u32, handle_hi, ctxt, 2);
>  	DECLARE_REG(u32, flags, ctxt, 3);
> +	u32 offset, len, fraglen, fragoff, em_mem_access_off;
>  	struct ffa_mem_region_attributes *ep_mem_access;
>  	struct ffa_composite_mem_region *reg;
> -	u32 offset, len, fraglen, fragoff;
>  	struct ffa_mem_region *buf;
>  	int ret = 0;
>  	u64 handle;
> @@ -599,8 +606,14 @@ static void do_ffa_mem_reclaim(struct arm_smccc_1_2_regs *res,
>  	len = res->a1;
>  	fraglen = res->a2;
>  
> -	ep_mem_access = (void *)buf +
> -			ffa_mem_desc_offset(buf, 0, hyp_ffa_version);
> +	em_mem_access_off = ffa_mem_desc_offset(buf, 0, hyp_ffa_version);
> +	if ((u64)em_mem_access_off + ffa_emad_size_get(hyp_ffa_version) > fraglen) {

ditto. ffa_mem_desc_offset()

> +		ret = FFA_RET_INVALID_PARAMETERS;
> +		ffa_rx_release(res);
> +		goto out_unlock;
> +	}
> +
> +	ep_mem_access = (void *)buf + em_mem_access_off;
>  	offset = ep_mem_access->composite_off;
>  	/*
>  	 * We can trust the SPMD to get this right, but let's at least
> -- 
> 2.54.0.1136.gdb2ca164c4-goog
> 

  reply	other threads:[~2026-06-18 16:56 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 27+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2026-06-17 14:51 [PATCH v7 0/7] arm_ffa, KVM: Fix FF-A emad offset calculations Sebastian Ene
2026-06-17 14:51 ` Sebastian Ene via OP-TEE
2026-06-17 14:51 ` [PATCH v7 1/7] optee: ffa: Add NULL check in optee_ffa_lend_protmem Sebastian Ene
2026-06-17 14:51   ` Sebastian Ene via OP-TEE
2026-06-17 15:07   ` sashiko-bot
2026-06-17 14:51 ` [PATCH v7 2/7] firmware: arm_ffa: Fix out-of-bound writes in ffa_setup_and_transmit() Sebastian Ene
2026-06-17 14:51   ` Sebastian Ene via OP-TEE
2026-06-17 14:51 ` [PATCH v7 3/7] firmware: arm_ffa: Fix Endpoint Memory Access Descriptor offset calculation Sebastian Ene
2026-06-17 14:51   ` Sebastian Ene via OP-TEE
2026-06-17 14:51 ` [PATCH v7 4/7] KVM: arm64: Fix bounds checking in do_ffa_mem_reclaim() Sebastian Ene
2026-06-17 14:51   ` Sebastian Ene via OP-TEE
2026-06-17 15:18   ` sashiko-bot
2026-06-18 16:19   ` Vincent Donnefort
2026-06-18 16:19     ` Vincent Donnefort via OP-TEE
2026-06-17 14:51 ` [PATCH v7 5/7] KVM: arm64: Validate the offset to the mem access descriptor Sebastian Ene
2026-06-17 14:51   ` Sebastian Ene via OP-TEE
2026-06-18 16:56   ` Vincent Donnefort via OP-TEE [this message]
2026-06-18 16:56     ` Vincent Donnefort
2026-06-17 14:51 ` [PATCH v7 6/7] KVM: arm64: Ensure FFA ranges are page aligned Sebastian Ene
2026-06-17 14:51   ` Sebastian Ene via OP-TEE
2026-06-18 17:09   ` Vincent Donnefort via OP-TEE
2026-06-18 17:09     ` Vincent Donnefort
2026-06-17 14:51 ` [PATCH v7 7/7] KVM: arm64: Zero out the stack initialized data in the FFA handler Sebastian Ene
2026-06-17 14:51   ` Sebastian Ene via OP-TEE
2026-06-17 15:29   ` sashiko-bot
2026-06-18 17:14   ` Vincent Donnefort
2026-06-18 17:14     ` Vincent Donnefort via OP-TEE

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=ajQjOH9Cjk1UqdT-@google.com \
    --to=op-tee@lists.trustedfirmware.org \
    --cc=android-kvm@google.com \
    --cc=catalin.marinas@arm.com \
    --cc=joey.gouly@arm.com \
    --cc=kvmarm@lists.linux.dev \
    --cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=maz@kernel.org \
    --cc=mrigendra.chaubey@gmail.com \
    --cc=oupton@kernel.org \
    --cc=perlarsen@google.com \
    --cc=sebastianene@google.com \
    --cc=seiden@linux.ibm.com \
    --cc=smostafa@google.com \
    --cc=sudeep.holla@kernel.org \
    --cc=sumit.garg@kernel.org \
    --cc=suzuki.poulose@arm.com \
    --cc=vdonnefort@google.com \
    --cc=will@kernel.org \
    --cc=yuzenghui@huawei.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.