From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mail-lf1-f43.google.com (mail-lf1-f43.google.com [209.85.167.43]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4EAF9175D59 for ; Tue, 17 Sep 2024 09:48:56 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=209.85.167.43 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1726566572; cv=none; b=Duw8gn/UJPcaVPb4HrVS5fbxQVTyiiHi5qtEMLg5XXb5RPX54uWq88UNsqJDh5bq6GDOiXkk0NckuMyZYMlMCm9SBj4svCvrl39JEQBJ5yR8hnx1I8AZPxDXlr06TZ2tSPyTJgVJb9LBHJSJy0jwlkOjK7Z7V7xu1nTIIgE2QPg= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1726566572; c=relaxed/simple; bh=x0Khn8huUisoszlE0mEAiaPbyYa2Sp+KfRqHCN9xHSg=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=Hr8EE49ZEWih5NmzQbWQaOmqNDHfcra69EUmSvY6oNPhI7tSOO/zyvF4hY4eu4ZznzKQi0OEstIqWZQKkF/q5MYnnIjP0nfmeOhkSC9VefgYF0r7Ag9vMLv4p8rEBBQEMfBmLgHOf2lQe9t4YYvRV7rwszOSb8fF814LGoOdZX0= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=reject dis=none) header.from=google.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=google.com; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=google.com header.i=@google.com header.b=C48M+Coj; arc=none smtp.client-ip=209.85.167.43 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=reject dis=none) header.from=google.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=google.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=google.com header.i=@google.com header.b="C48M+Coj" Received: by mail-lf1-f43.google.com with SMTP id 2adb3069b0e04-53661d95508so7095e87.1 for ; Tue, 17 Sep 2024 02:48:55 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=20230601; t=1726566534; x=1727171334; darn=lists.linux.dev; h=in-reply-to:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition :mime-version:references:message-id:subject:cc:to:from:date:from:to :cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=oNGxPHFyTwOGWUxhI2HLPoZN1QSNNpDRrCcM4Trhkt8=; b=C48M+CojnFZogdsxjDV0Ro02RxRpcoHynSKa6k6lRTpf/vX2t0pkzoeylVydkgnzMN SnjcubCZT5TYgIinK3EBzryv+JZfS+0VFSTRp9Tffobe/dzpw6PDI2VE/6bGDgnRqKKK dOjuVE0115BhTKnwOzIBuuObKRXmC7S/jE8mpB4JriJdQhlBm1NxQqUY7JDBi90KKeL8 Eu83Mt6GDoXNJJB1x3VRPEHq5K240ZyEHRPWfTVt3O2/oNrZDmaywlEXzomMzixZE7xW EBsO+7wHrff7RXwf+6m073+M/GV5Cl9t4g3Di97WglqxvT8SANjlgnQX3zxBAsQWgbbv e31A== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20230601; t=1726566534; x=1727171334; h=in-reply-to:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition :mime-version:references:message-id:subject:cc:to:from:date :x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=oNGxPHFyTwOGWUxhI2HLPoZN1QSNNpDRrCcM4Trhkt8=; b=KKerTfZLObT7dbGBsOYI+k3mE7CTKT5W9XlMf2mLeQMhRbO7aDALEsf82W4nbRRbDf W8AgoLhxKJUaaG7nxZ4bw8ib8Mip351NkmPNK0py4HM2cy6+OMM/zUycHofRcPoqpHiJ 1dk8KEUk3Qp5mFNZe8+Uv5hF/7MY4TYTL7rEyg9yNZb1+fifEPqKjdKsCpYYdANmOB9C HCW4SwXSLGENwvo2diSlwvFemVLoBO9kWzL8Op8GI9a3o6bjteBSNbXQCWJNEMZVfVjO tNxj/ZsQhayntp/SdLGbAWbR83Ur7eQUhpfBbPzKhFqDQbcskcu8vOqKO13dg+nUI9gU engQ== X-Forwarded-Encrypted: i=1; AJvYcCWpf716Tb6e33IB6xWf1iKxvb4V+Dplo6IvVhtIb9WUIrs6ZK2tM1D5fpfj5T8ZTKl/rq21acWU@lists.linux.dev X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0YwmRSL/3ZqIK4zzBjwyieZSGFR+RK9gKt8671VSna41A5dvfUls eMRueY/KbLeffuHqCkRHr07ZwvmYmqYPlMkKT2/lgicGvYJFisGZddOh/6hhAA== X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGHT+IG753oKcJhRrwoevlbm6QMdqTgcn7I6H4uCXXVzFfJ7Uy1lB5slwSYlnEJ6eqpTHciyovo7Lg== X-Received: by 2002:a05:6512:3da4:b0:536:52dc:291f with SMTP id 2adb3069b0e04-5369c3a3e71mr131542e87.1.1726566533718; Tue, 17 Sep 2024 02:48:53 -0700 (PDT) Received: from google.com (205.215.190.35.bc.googleusercontent.com. [35.190.215.205]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id ffacd0b85a97d-378e780016asm9132715f8f.85.2024.09.17.02.48.52 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Tue, 17 Sep 2024 02:48:52 -0700 (PDT) Date: Tue, 17 Sep 2024 09:48:44 +0000 From: Mostafa Saleh To: Jason Gunthorpe Cc: acpica-devel@lists.linux.dev, Hanjun Guo , iommu@lists.linux.dev, Joerg Roedel , Kevin Tian , kvm@vger.kernel.org, Len Brown , linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, Lorenzo Pieralisi , "Rafael J. Wysocki" , Robert Moore , Robin Murphy , Sudeep Holla , Will Deacon , Alex Williamson , Eric Auger , Jean-Philippe Brucker , Moritz Fischer , Michael Shavit , Nicolin Chen , patches@lists.linux.dev, Shameerali Kolothum Thodi Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 2/8] iommu/arm-smmu-v3: Use S2FWB when available Message-ID: References: <0-v2-621370057090+91fec-smmuv3_nesting_jgg@nvidia.com> <2-v2-621370057090+91fec-smmuv3_nesting_jgg@nvidia.com> <20240830164019.GU3773488@nvidia.com> <20240903000546.GD3773488@nvidia.com> <20240903233340.GH3773488@nvidia.com> <20240910202251.GJ58321@nvidia.com> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: patches@lists.linux.dev List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit In-Reply-To: <20240910202251.GJ58321@nvidia.com> On Tue, Sep 10, 2024 at 05:22:51PM -0300, Jason Gunthorpe wrote: > On Tue, Sep 10, 2024 at 10:55:51AM +0000, Mostafa Saleh wrote: > > On Tue, Sep 03, 2024 at 08:33:40PM -0300, Jason Gunthorpe wrote: > > > On Tue, Sep 03, 2024 at 07:57:01AM +0000, Mostafa Saleh wrote: > > > > > > > Basically, I believe we shouldn’t set FWB blindly just because it’s supported, > > > > I don’t see how it’s useful for stage-2 only domains. > > > > > > And the only problem we can see is some niche scenario where incoming > > > memory attributes that are already requesting cachable combine to a > > > different kind of cachable? > > > > No, it’s not about the niche scenario, as I mentioned I don’t think > > we should enable FWB because it just exists. One can argue the opposite, > > if S2FWB is no different why enable it? > > Well, I'd argue that it provides more certainty for the kernel that > the DMA API behavior is matched by HW behavior. But I don't feel strongly. > > I adjusted the patch to only enable it for nesting parents. > > > AFAIU, FWB would be useful in cases where the hypervisor(or VMM) knows > > better than the VM, for example some devices MMIO space are emulated so > > they are normal memory and it’s more efficient to use memory attributes. > > Not quite, the purpose of FWB is to allow the hypervisor to avoid > costly cache flushing. It is specifically to protect the hypervisor > against a VM causing the caches to go incoherent. > > Caches that are unexpectedly incoherent are a security problem for the > hypervisor. I see, thanks for explaining, I got confused about the device emulation case, it’s also about corruption because of a mismatch of memory attributes, something like: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1679680 At the moment, I see KVM doesn’t really touch guest memory, but it does CMO for guest map(in case memslot had already some data) and on unmap, which I believe has significant performance improvement. > > > > > and we should only set FWB for coherent > > > > devices in nested setup only where the VMM(or hypervisor) knows better than > > > > the VM. > > > > > > I don't want to touch the 'only coherent devices' question. Last time > > > I tried to do that I got told every option was wrong. > > > > > > I would be fine to only enable for nesting parent domains. It is > > > mandatory here and we definitely don't support non-cachable nesting > > > today. Can we agree on that? > > > > Why is it mandatory? > > Because iommufd/vfio doesn't have cache flushing. > I see. > > I think a supporting point for this, is that KVM does the same for > > the CPU, where it enables FWB for VMs if supported. I have this on > > my list to study if that can be improved. But may be if we are out > > of options that would be a start. > > When KVM turns on S2FWB it stops doing cache flushing. As I understand > it S2FWB is significantly a performance optimization. > > On the VFIO side we don't have cache flushing at all. So enforcing > cache consistency is mandatory for security. > > For native VFIO we set IOMMU_CACHE and expect that the contract with > the IOMMU is that no cache flushing is required. > > For nested we set S2FWB/CANWBS to prevent the VM from disabling VFIO's > IOMMU_CACHE and again the contract with the HW is that no cache > flushing is required. > > Thus VFIO is security correct even though it doesn't cache flush. > > None of this has anything to do with device coherence capability. It > is why I keep saying incoherent devices must be blocked from VFIO > because it cannot operate them securely/correctly. > > Fixing that is a whole other topic, Yi has a series for it on x86 at > least.. I see, that makes sense to only support it for nested domains on the assumption they are only used for VFIO/IOMMUFD till we figure out non-coherent devices, I guess you are referring to: https://lore.kernel.org/all/ZltQ3PyHKiQmN9SU@nvidia.com/t/#me702dd242782393eb7769000c96702a0fed7f6ca Thanks, Mostafa > > Jason