From: Sebastian Ene <sebastianene@google.com>
To: Mostafa Saleh <smostafa@google.com>
Cc: op-tee@lists.trustedfirmware.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
kvmarm@lists.linux.dev, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
maz@kernel.org, oupton@kernel.org, joey.gouly@arm.com,
suzuki.poulose@arm.com, catalin.marinas@arm.com,
jens.wiklander@linaro.org, sumit.garg@kernel.org,
vdonnefort@google.com, sudeep.holla@kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v6 5/6] KVM: arm64: Validate the offset to the mem access descriptor
Date: Fri, 12 Jun 2026 15:20:30 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <aiwjvihrwbInBqGn@google.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20260527150236.1978655-6-smostafa@google.com>
On Wed, May 27, 2026 at 03:02:35PM +0000, Mostafa Saleh wrote:
> From: Sebastian Ene <sebastianene@google.com>
>
> 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.
>
> [@Mostafa, Add missing call to ffa_rx_release() and use fraglen
> as the max buffer size as it is the only intialised part]
>
> 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 | 25 ++++++++++++++++++-------
> 1 file changed, 18 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/arch/arm64/kvm/hyp/nvhe/ffa.c b/arch/arm64/kvm/hyp/nvhe/ffa.c
> index b6cf9ad82e12..a12e01883314 100644
> --- a/arch/arm64/kvm/hyp/nvhe/ffa.c
> +++ b/arch/arm64/kvm/hyp/nvhe/ffa.c
> @@ -476,10 +476,10 @@ 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;
>
> if (addr_mbz || npages_mbz || fraglen > len ||
> @@ -489,7 +489,7 @@ static void __do_ffa_mem_xfer(const u64 func_id,
> }
>
Hi Mostafa,
> if (fraglen < sizeof(struct ffa_mem_region) +
> - sizeof(struct ffa_mem_region_attributes)) {
> + ffa_emad_size_get(hyp_ffa_version)) {
> ret = FFA_RET_INVALID_PARAMETERS;
> goto out;
> }
Here sashiko complains about a compatibility break with v1.0 even though
it is not from this change. This is because the size of sizeof(struct
ffa_mem_region) was 36 bytes in v1.0 and now it is 48.
This check can cause "perfectly valid v1.0 memory transfers to be rejected"
(from sashiko).
Other than that this looks good. I will spin a new version of this
series.
> @@ -508,8 +508,13 @@ 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) {
> + 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 +579,9 @@ 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 +604,14 @@ 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) {
> + 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
> --
> 2.54.0.746.g67dd491aae-goog
>
Thanks,
Sebastian
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-06-12 15:20 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-05-27 15:02 [PATCH v6 0/6] arm_ffa, KVM: Fix FF-A emad offset calculations Mostafa Saleh
2026-05-27 15:02 ` [PATCH v6 1/6] optee: ffa: Add NULL check in optee_ffa_lend_protmem Mostafa Saleh
2026-05-27 18:55 ` Sumit Garg
2026-05-27 15:02 ` [PATCH v6 2/6] firmware: arm_ffa: Fix out-of-bound writes in ffa_setup_and_transmit() Mostafa Saleh
2026-05-27 15:02 ` [PATCH v6 3/6] firmware: arm_ffa: Fix Endpoint Memory Access Descriptor offset calculation Mostafa Saleh
2026-06-12 13:48 ` Sebastian Ene
2026-05-27 15:02 ` [PATCH v6 4/6] KVM: arm64: Fix bounds checking in do_ffa_mem_reclaim() Mostafa Saleh
2026-06-12 14:22 ` Sebastian Ene
2026-05-27 15:02 ` [PATCH v6 5/6] KVM: arm64: Validate the offset to the mem access descriptor Mostafa Saleh
2026-06-12 15:20 ` Sebastian Ene [this message]
2026-05-27 15:02 ` [PATCH v6 6/6] KVM: arm64: Ensure FFA ranges are page aligned Mostafa Saleh
2026-06-12 16:07 ` Sebastian Ene
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=aiwjvihrwbInBqGn@google.com \
--to=sebastianene@google.com \
--cc=catalin.marinas@arm.com \
--cc=jens.wiklander@linaro.org \
--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=op-tee@lists.trustedfirmware.org \
--cc=oupton@kernel.org \
--cc=smostafa@google.com \
--cc=sudeep.holla@kernel.org \
--cc=sumit.garg@kernel.org \
--cc=suzuki.poulose@arm.com \
--cc=vdonnefort@google.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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox