From: "Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@redhat.com>
To: Halil Pasic <pasic@linux.ibm.com>
Cc: Daniel Henrique Barboza <danielhb413@gmail.com>,
Jason Wang <jasowang@redhat.com>,
Cornelia Huck <cohuck@redhat.com>,
Brijesh Singh <brijesh.singh@amd.com>,
qemu-devel@nongnu.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/1] virtio: fix feature negotiation for ACCESS_PLATFORM
Date: Sun, 6 Mar 2022 05:15:20 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20220306051403-mutt-send-email-mst@kernel.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20220304162344.539030-1-pasic@linux.ibm.com>
On Fri, Mar 04, 2022 at 05:23:44PM +0100, Halil Pasic wrote:
> Unlike most virtio features ACCESS_PLATFORM is considered mandatory by
> QEMU, i.e. the driver must accept it if offered by the device. The
> virtio specification says that the driver SHOULD accept the
> ACCESS_PLATFORM feature if offered, and that the device MAY fail to
> operate if ACCESS_PLATFORM was offered but not negotiated.
>
> While a SHOULD ain't exactly a MUST, we are certainly allowed to fail
> the device when the driver fences ACCESS_PLATFORM. With commit
> 2943b53f68 ("virtio: force VIRTIO_F_IOMMU_PLATFORM") we already made the
> decision to do so whenever the get_dma_as() callback is implemented (by
> the bus), which in practice means for the entirety of virtio-pci.
>
> That means, if the device needs to translate I/O addresses, then
> ACCESS_PLATFORM is mandatory. The aforementioned commit tells us in the
> commit message that this is for security reasons. More precisely if we
> were to allow a less then trusted driver (e.g. an user-space driver, or
> a nested guest) to make the device bypass the IOMMU by not negotiating
> ACCESS_PLATFORM, then the guest kernel would have no ability to
> control/police (by programming the IOMMU) what pieces of guest memory
> the driver may manipulate using the device. Which would break security
> assumptions within the guest.
>
> If ACCESS_PLATFORM is offered not because we want the device to utilize
> an IOMMU and do address translation, but because the device does not
> have access to the entire guest RAM, and needs the driver to grant
> access to the bits it needs access to (e.g. confidential guest support),
> we still require the guest to have the corresponding logic and to accept
> ACCESS_PLATFORM. If the driver does not accept ACCESS_PLATFORM, then
> things are bound to go wrong, and we may see failures much less graceful
> than failing the device because the driver didn't negotiate
> ACCESS_PLATFORM.
>
> So let us make ACCESS_PLATFORM mandatory for the driver regardless
> of whether the get_dma_as() callback is implemented or not.
>
> Signed-off-by: Halil Pasic <pasic@linux.ibm.com>
> Fixes: 2943b53f68 ("virtio: force VIRTIO_F_IOMMU_PLATFORM")
I tried to apply this on top of
virtio: fix the condition for iommu_platform not supported
and it fails.
Can you rebase this on top of my tree pls?
> ---
> v2 -> v2:
> * Change comment: reflect that this is not about the verify
> but also about the device features as seen by the driver (Connie)
> RFC -> v1:
> * Tweaked the commit message and fixed typos (Connie)
> * Added two sentences discussing the security implications (Michael)
>
> This patch is based on:
> https://www.mail-archive.com/qemu-devel@nongnu.org/msg866199.html
>
> During the review of "virtio: fix the condition for iommu_platform not
> supported" Daniel raised the question why do we "force IOMMU_PLATFORM"
> iff has_iommu && !!klass->get_dma_as. My answer to that was, that
> this logic ain't right.
>
> While at it I used the opportunity to re-organize the code a little
> and provide an explanatory comment.
> ---
> hw/virtio/virtio-bus.c | 21 ++++++++++++++-------
> 1 file changed, 14 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/hw/virtio/virtio-bus.c b/hw/virtio/virtio-bus.c
> index fbf0dd14b8..d7ec023adf 100644
> --- a/hw/virtio/virtio-bus.c
> +++ b/hw/virtio/virtio-bus.c
> @@ -78,16 +78,23 @@ void virtio_bus_device_plugged(VirtIODevice *vdev, Error **errp)
> return;
> }
>
> - vdev_has_iommu = virtio_host_has_feature(vdev, VIRTIO_F_IOMMU_PLATFORM);
> - if (klass->get_dma_as != NULL && has_iommu) {
> + vdev->dma_as = &address_space_memory;
> + if (has_iommu) {
> + vdev_has_iommu = virtio_host_has_feature(vdev, VIRTIO_F_IOMMU_PLATFORM);
> + /*
> + * Present IOMMU_PLATFORM to the driver iff iommu_plattform=on and
> + * device operational. If the driver does not accept IOMMU_PLATFORM
> + * we fail the device.
> + */
> virtio_add_feature(&vdev->host_features, VIRTIO_F_IOMMU_PLATFORM);
> - vdev->dma_as = klass->get_dma_as(qbus->parent);
> - if (!vdev_has_iommu && vdev->dma_as != &address_space_memory) {
> - error_setg(errp,
> + if (klass->get_dma_as) {
> + vdev->dma_as = klass->get_dma_as(qbus->parent);
> + if (!vdev_has_iommu && vdev->dma_as != &address_space_memory) {
> + error_setg(errp,
> "iommu_platform=true is not supported by the device");
> + return;
> + }
> }
> - } else {
> - vdev->dma_as = &address_space_memory;
> }
> }
>
>
> base-commit: 01d1ba29d05b992321d9941e8151c52c6845ce3c
> --
> 2.32.0
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2022-03-06 10:17 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 3+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2022-03-04 16:23 [PATCH v2 1/1] virtio: fix feature negotiation for ACCESS_PLATFORM Halil Pasic
2022-03-06 10:15 ` Michael S. Tsirkin [this message]
2022-03-07 11:17 ` Halil Pasic
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=20220306051403-mutt-send-email-mst@kernel.org \
--to=mst@redhat.com \
--cc=brijesh.singh@amd.com \
--cc=cohuck@redhat.com \
--cc=danielhb413@gmail.com \
--cc=jasowang@redhat.com \
--cc=pasic@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=qemu-devel@nongnu.org \
/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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).