Re: [PATCH v2] vfio: Follow a strict lifetime for struct iommu_group

Jason Gunthorpe
2022-10-04T15:40:31Z

On Tue, Oct 04, 2022 at 05:19:07PM +0200, Christian Borntraeger wrote:
> Am 27.09.22 um 22:05 schrieb Alex Williamson:
> > On Mon, 26 Sep 2022 13:03:56 -0400
> > Matthew Rosato <mjrosato@linux.ibm.com> wrote:
> >
> > > On 9/22/22 8:06 PM, Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
> > > > The iommu_group comes from the struct device that a driver has been bound
> > > > to and then created a struct vfio_device against. To keep the iommu layer
> > > > sane we want to have a simple rule that only an attached driver should be
> > > > using the iommu API. Particularly only an attached driver should hold
> > > > ownership.
> > > >
> > > > In VFIO's case since it uses the group APIs and it shares between
> > > > different drivers it is a bit more complicated, but the principle still
> > > > holds.
> > > >
> > > > Solve this by waiting for all users of the vfio_group to stop before
> > > > allowing vfio_unregister_group_dev() to complete. This is done with a new
> > > > completion to know when the users go away and an additional refcount to
> > > > keep track of how many device drivers are sharing the vfio group. The last
> > > > driver to be unregistered will clean up the group.
> > > >
> > > > This solves crashes in the S390 iommu driver that come because VFIO ends
> > > > up racing releasing ownership (which attaches the default iommu_domain to
> > > > the device) with the removal of that same device from the iommu
> > > > driver. This is a side case that iommu drivers should not have to cope
> > > > with.
> > > >
> > > > iommu driver failed to attach the default/blocking domain
> > > > WARNING: CPU: 0 PID: 5082 at drivers/iommu/iommu.c:1961 iommu_detach_group+0x6c/0x80
> > > > Modules linked in: macvtap macvlan tap vfio_pci vfio_pci_core irqbypass vfio_virqfd kvm nft_fib_inet nft_fib_ipv4 nft_fib_ipv6 nft_fib nft_reject_inet nf_reject_ipv4 nf_reject_ipv6 nft_reject nft_ct nft_chain_nat nf_nat nf_conntrack nf_defrag_ipv6 nf_defrag_ipv4 ip_set nf_tables nfnetlink mlx5_ib sunrpc ib_uverbs ism smc uvdevice ib_core s390_trng eadm_sch tape_3590 tape tape_class vfio_ccw mdev vfio_iommu_type1 vfio zcrypt_cex4 sch_fq_codel configfs ghash_s390 prng chacha_s390 libchacha aes_s390 mlx5_core des_s390 libdes sha3_512_s390 nvme sha3_256_s390 sha512_s390 sha256_s390 sha1_s390 sha_common nvme_core zfcp scsi_transport_fc pkey zcrypt rng_core autofs4
> > > > CPU: 0 PID: 5082 Comm: qemu-system-s39 Tainted: G W 6.0.0-rc3 #5
> > > > Hardware name: IBM 3931 A01 782 (LPAR)
> > > > Krnl PSW : 0704c00180000000 000000095bb10d28 (iommu_detach_group+0x70/0x80)
> > > > R:0 T:1 IO:1 EX:1 Key:0 M:1 W:0 P:0 AS:3 CC:0 PM:0 RI:0 EA:3
> > > > Krnl GPRS: 0000000000000001 0000000900000027 0000000000000039 000000095c97ffe0
> > > > 00000000fffeffff 00000009fc290000 00000000af1fda50 00000000af590b58
> > > > 00000000af1fdaf0 0000000135c7a320 0000000135e52258 0000000135e52200
> > > > 00000000a29e8000 00000000af590b40 000000095bb10d24 0000038004b13c98
> > > > Krnl Code: 000000095bb10d18: c020003d56fc larl %r2,000000095c2bbb10
> > > > 000000095bb10d1e: c0e50019d901 brasl %r14,000000095be4bf20
> > > > #000000095bb10d24: af000000 mc 0,0
> > > > >000000095bb10d28: b904002a lgr %r2,%r10
> > > > 000000095bb10d2c: ebaff0a00004 lmg %r10,%r15,160(%r15)
> > > > 000000095bb10d32: c0f4001aa867 brcl 15,000000095be65e00
> > > > 000000095bb10d38: c004002168e0 brcl 0,000000095bf3def8
> > > > 000000095bb10d3e: eb6ff0480024 stmg %r6,%r15,72(%r15)
> > > > Call Trace:
> > > > [<000000095bb10d28>] iommu_detach_group+0x70/0x80
> > > > ([<000000095bb10d24>] iommu_detach_group+0x6c/0x80)
> > > > [<000003ff80243b0e>] vfio_iommu_type1_detach_group+0x136/0x6c8 [vfio_iommu_type1]
> > > > [<000003ff80137780>] __vfio_group_unset_container+0x58/0x158 [vfio]
> > > > [<000003ff80138a16>] vfio_group_fops_unl_ioctl+0x1b6/0x210 [vfio]
> > > > pci 0004:00:00.0: Removing from iommu group 4
> > > > [<000000095b5b62e8>] __s390x_sys_ioctl+0xc0/0x100
> > > > [<000000095be5d3b4>] __do_syscall+0x1d4/0x200
> > > > [<000000095be6c072>] system_call+0x82/0xb0
> > > > Last Breaking-Event-Address:
> > > > [<000000095be4bf80>] __warn_printk+0x60/0x68
> > > >
> > > > It indicates that domain->ops->attach_dev() failed because the driver has
> > > > already passed the point of destructing the device.
> > > >
> > > > Fixes: 9ac8545199a1 ("iommu: Fix use-after-free in iommu_release_device")
> > > > Reported-by: Matthew Rosato <mjrosato@linux.ibm.com>
> > > > Tested-by: Matthew Rosato <mjrosato@linux.ibm.com>
> > > > Signed-off-by: Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@nvidia.com>
> > > > ---
> > > > drivers/vfio/vfio.h | 8 +++++
> > > > drivers/vfio/vfio_main.c | 68 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++--------------
> > > > 2 files changed, 53 insertions(+), 23 deletions(-)
> > > >
> > > > v2
> > > > - Rebase on the vfio struct device series and the container.c series
> > > > - Drop patches 1 & 2, we need to have working error unwind, so another
> > > > test is not a problem
> > > > - Fold iommu_group_remove_device() into vfio_device_remove_group() so
> > > > that it forms a strict pairing with the two allocation functions.
> > > > - Drop the iommu patch from the series, it needs more work and discussion
> > > > v1 https://lore.kernel.org/r/0-v1-ef00ffecea52+2cb-iommu_group_lifetime_jgg@nvidia.com
> > > >
> > > > This could probably use another quick sanity test due to all the rebasing,
> > > > Alex if you are happy let's wait for Matthew.
> > >
> > > I have been re-running the same series of tests on this version (on top of vfio-next) and this still resolves the reported issue. Thanks Jason!
> >
> > Thanks all. Applied to vfio next branch for v6.1. Thanks,
>
> So now I have bisected this to a regression in our KVM CI for vfio-ap. Our testcase MultipleMdevAPMatrixTestCase hangs forever.
> I see virtnodedevd spinning 100% and "mdevctl stop --uuid=d70d7685-a1b5-47a1-bdea-336925e0a95d" seems to wait for something:
>
> [ 186.815543] task:mdevctl state:D stack: 0 pid: 1639 ppid: 1604 flags:0x00000001
> [ 186.815546] Call Trace:
> [ 186.815547] [<0000002baf277386>] __schedule+0x296/0x650
> [ 186.815549] [<0000002baf2777a2>] schedule+0x62/0x108
> [ 186.815551] [<0000002baf27db20>] schedule_timeout+0xc0/0x108
> [ 186.815553] [<0000002baf278166>] __wait_for_common+0xc6/0x250
> [ 186.815556] [<000003ff800c263a>] vfio_device_remove_group.isra.0+0xb2/0x118 [vfio]
> [ 186.815561] [<000003ff805caadc>] vfio_ap_mdev_remove+0x2c/0x198 [vfio_ap]
> [ 186.815565] [<0000002baef1d4de>] device_release_driver_internal+0x1c6/0x288
> [ 186.815570] [<0000002baef1b27c>] bus_remove_device+0x10c/0x198
> [ 186.815572] [<0000002baef14b54>] device_del+0x19c/0x3e0
> [ 186.815575] [<000003ff800d9e3a>] mdev_device_remove+0xb2/0x108 [mdev]
> [ 186.815579] [<000003ff800da096>] remove_store+0x7e/0x90 [mdev]
> [ 186.815581] [<0000002baea53c30>] kernfs_fop_write_iter+0x138/0x210
> [ 186.815586] [<0000002bae98e310>] vfs_write+0x1a0/0x2f0
> [ 186.815588] [<0000002bae98e6d8>] ksys_write+0x70/0x100
> [ 186.815590] [<0000002baf26fe2c>] __do_syscall+0x1d4/0x200
> [ 186.815593] [<0000002baf27eb42>] system_call+0x82/0xb0

Does some userspace have the group FD open when it stucks like this,
eg what does fuser say?

Jason