From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.5 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_ADSP_CUSTOM_MED, DKIM_INVALID,DKIM_SIGNED,FREEMAIL_FORGED_FROMDOMAIN,FREEMAIL_FROM, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id EA56EC49EA5 for ; Thu, 24 Jun 2021 10:42:47 +0000 (UTC) Received: from lists.ozlabs.org (lists.ozlabs.org [112.213.38.117]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 5AF7D613FD for ; Thu, 24 Jun 2021 10:42:47 +0000 (UTC) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org 5AF7D613FD Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=none dis=none) header.from=gmail.com Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=linuxppc-dev-bounces+linuxppc-dev=archiver.kernel.org@lists.ozlabs.org Received: from boromir.ozlabs.org (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by lists.ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4G9cCp6XWfz3bTh for ; Thu, 24 Jun 2021 20:42:46 +1000 (AEST) Authentication-Results: lists.ozlabs.org; dkim=fail reason="signature verification failed" (2048-bit key; unprotected) header.d=gmail.com header.i=@gmail.com header.a=rsa-sha256 header.s=20161025 header.b=Kt+9hz5Z; dkim-atps=neutral Authentication-Results: lists.ozlabs.org; spf=pass (sender SPF authorized) smtp.mailfrom=gmail.com (client-ip=2607:f8b0:4864:20::536; helo=mail-pg1-x536.google.com; envelope-from=npiggin@gmail.com; receiver=) Authentication-Results: lists.ozlabs.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key; unprotected) header.d=gmail.com header.i=@gmail.com header.a=rsa-sha256 header.s=20161025 header.b=Kt+9hz5Z; dkim-atps=neutral Received: from mail-pg1-x536.google.com (mail-pg1-x536.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::536]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by lists.ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4G9cCJ6ZgRz2xvV for ; Thu, 24 Jun 2021 20:42:18 +1000 (AEST) Received: by mail-pg1-x536.google.com with SMTP id n12so4359985pgs.13 for ; Thu, 24 Jun 2021 03:42:17 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=date:from:subject:to:cc:references:in-reply-to:mime-version :message-id:content-transfer-encoding; bh=NfjdhOW72m4TGpvzWGEQF11KzSsneVbaVBvFK0bGPzo=; b=Kt+9hz5Z8hf17MTaP2NEbCNsixEB/2vtcneDIWMxInZE3wFpBTCY4arVW85yk4tRHF qWXnzq5TbY8JfmQrKqxmZnou8HmT8i1seCjd1BlC3DaEQNjDAwV+HQjRqrh2wSC5wL59 gRrb2rxjfZldQEn+6eMb0tmL7unUZmTBjbxFxwf6fUug4isZHK1CcpQ0getq8GAd87FC 3RcDqKD/Mv0yWnn2UAF2jMZ1K/PXC5Gqwy+wDcve3LXPzWTqm+dcHR3tVukvmCrbGHtj N0va4eRcYEBOnrKc/XVLBME0xL1myho/N5KENcJl2Jx0DUZHv582U2/2wqKp+nzNi87p llKg== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:date:from:subject:to:cc:references:in-reply-to :mime-version:message-id:content-transfer-encoding; bh=NfjdhOW72m4TGpvzWGEQF11KzSsneVbaVBvFK0bGPzo=; b=pCh9C0o/PxkdSyCbzQfT787iAKFAF4PSiU5nKDJj4POJufh2yFL9W6wzPa1UvSqbNP H1ffeACnjQb0XtfRDuQnCukD5PmElVAo6TAv0r1snszz5VE7TZXVww9wMTCQfRMFGjbD isNqoK2YIqn/WZjYl44VGh61gwLxy4LHOGXTrwqEdH55TCpitF7PIMdZYHw8+deJzclZ FtBO55US9k4cCszL9MCM+oLwuOq/ERAkrj35sbHROpYMNmGmYHT8RRFtruk7tY/MEHFX 0X+GjvusEn74wifAF+yVQ/dtkJg9/8J2cMl+Wqztx/Kt60ni6r2sh2CwyJPae8uF5Rp+ Cpug== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM532lbjP5FOJ0owP4oU5Jk2jAi+ldA9Se1n1taxif5TJFB30AkWG4 otDKhUbS09UDoZJivsQj9Cc= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJx+bbBfj2pzk/mB2ERG+jW9T31gVCsxpF6k7D325eLHwjfeRucb+BobnHJ3y5XGrFTWG6Ebcw== X-Received: by 2002:a63:586:: with SMTP id 128mr4140080pgf.366.1624531334522; Thu, 24 Jun 2021 03:42:14 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost (60-242-147-73.tpgi.com.au. [60.242.147.73]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id i8sm2522609pfq.165.2021.06.24.03.42.13 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Thu, 24 Jun 2021 03:42:14 -0700 (PDT) Date: Thu, 24 Jun 2021 20:42:08 +1000 From: Nicholas Piggin Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/6] KVM: mmu: also return page from gfn_to_pfn To: Aleksandar Markovic , Huacai Chen , Marc Zyngier , Paul Mackerras , Paolo Bonzini , David Stevens , Zhenyu Wang , Zhi Wang References: <20210624035749.4054934-1-stevensd@google.com> <20210624035749.4054934-3-stevensd@google.com> <1624524331.zsin3qejl9.astroid@bobo.none> <201b68a7-10ea-d656-0c1e-5511b1f22674@redhat.com> <1624528342.s2ezcyp90x.astroid@bobo.none> <1624529635.75a1ann91v.astroid@bobo.none> In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Message-Id: <1624531085.fax3fcqpgc.astroid@bobo.none> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-BeenThere: linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Linux on PowerPC Developers Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Cc: Wanpeng Li , kvm@vger.kernel.org, Suzuki K Poulose , Alexandru Elisei , intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org, linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org, kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu, Will Deacon , James Morse , kvm-ppc@vger.kernel.org, Sean Christopherson , Vitaly Kuznetsov , linux-mips@vger.kernel.org, intel-gvt-dev@lists.freedesktop.org, Joerg Roedel , linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, Jim Mattson Errors-To: linuxppc-dev-bounces+linuxppc-dev=archiver.kernel.org@lists.ozlabs.org Sender: "Linuxppc-dev" Excerpts from Paolo Bonzini's message of June 24, 2021 8:21 pm: > On 24/06/21 12:17, Nicholas Piggin wrote: >>> If all callers were updated that is one thing, but from the changelog >>> it sounds like that would not happen and there would be some gfn_to_pfn >>> users left over. >>> >>> But yes in the end you would either need to make gfn_to_pfn never retur= n >>> a page found via follow_pte, or change all callers to the new way. If >>> the plan is for the latter then I guess that's fine. >> >> Actually in that case anyway I don't see the need -- the existence of >> gfn_to_pfn is enough to know it might be buggy. It can just as easily >> be grepped for as kvm_pfn_page_unwrap. >=20 > Sure, but that would leave us with longer function names=20 > (gfn_to_pfn_page* instead of gfn_to_pfn*). So the "safe" use is the one=20 > that looks worse and the unsafe use is the one that looks safe. The churn isn't justified because of function name length. Choose g2pp()=20 if you want a non-descriptive but short name. The existing name isn't good anyway because it not only looks up a pfn=20 but also a page, and more importantly it gets a ref on the page. The name should be changed if you introduce a new API. >> And are gfn_to_page cases also >> vulernable to the same issue? >=20 > No, they're just broken for the VM_IO|VM_PFNMAP case. No they aren't vulnerable, or they are vunlerable but also broken in=20 other cases? Thanks, Nick