From: Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com> To: Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@nvidia.com> Cc: Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>, Lorenzo Pieralisi <lpieralisi@kernel.org>, ankita@nvidia.com, maz@kernel.org, oliver.upton@linux.dev, aniketa@nvidia.com, cjia@nvidia.com, kwankhede@nvidia.com, targupta@nvidia.com, vsethi@nvidia.com, acurrid@nvidia.com, apopple@nvidia.com, jhubbard@nvidia.com, danw@nvidia.com, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, kvmarm@lists.linux.dev, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH v1 2/2] KVM: arm64: allow the VM to select DEVICE_* and NORMAL_NC for IO memory Date: Fri, 20 Oct 2023 12:21:50 +0100 [thread overview] Message-ID: <ZTJizmxV4Gtb4g3S@arm.com> (raw) In-Reply-To: <20231019115142.GQ3952@nvidia.com> On Thu, Oct 19, 2023 at 08:51:42AM -0300, Jason Gunthorpe wrote: > On Thu, Oct 19, 2023 at 12:07:42PM +0100, Catalin Marinas wrote: > > Talking to Will earlier, I think we can deem the PCIe scenario > > (somewhat) safe but not as a generic mechanism for other non-PCIe > > devices (e.g. platform). With this concern, can we make this Stage 2 > > relaxation in KVM only for vfio-pci mappings? I don't have an example of > > non-PCIe device assignment to figure out how this should work though. > > It is not a KVM problem. As I implied above it is VFIO's > responsibility to reliably reset the device, not KVMs. If for some > reason VFIO cannot do that on some SOC then VFIO devices should not > exist. > > It is not KVM's job to double guess VFIO's own security properties. I'd argue that since KVM is the one relaxing the memory attributes beyond what the VFIO driver allows the VMM to use, it is KVM's job to consider the security implications. This is fine for vfio-pci and Normal_NC but I'm not sure we can generalise. > Specifically about platform the generic VFIO platform driver is the > ACPI based one. If the FW provides an ACPI method for device reset > that is not properly serializing, that is a FW bug. We can quirk it in > VFIO and block using those devices if they actually exist. > > I expect the non-generic VFIO platform drivers to take care of this > issue internally with, barriers, read from devices, whatver is > required to make their SOCs order properly. Just as I would expect a > normal Linux platform driver to directly manage whatever > implementation specific ordering quirks the SOC may have. This would be a new requirement if an existing VFIO platform driver relied on all mappings being Device. But maybe that's just theoretical at the moment, are there any concrete examples outside vfio-pci? If not, we can document it as per Lorenzo's suggestion to summarise this discussion under Documentation/. -- Catalin
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com> To: Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@nvidia.com> Cc: Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>, Lorenzo Pieralisi <lpieralisi@kernel.org>, ankita@nvidia.com, maz@kernel.org, oliver.upton@linux.dev, aniketa@nvidia.com, cjia@nvidia.com, kwankhede@nvidia.com, targupta@nvidia.com, vsethi@nvidia.com, acurrid@nvidia.com, apopple@nvidia.com, jhubbard@nvidia.com, danw@nvidia.com, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, kvmarm@lists.linux.dev, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH v1 2/2] KVM: arm64: allow the VM to select DEVICE_* and NORMAL_NC for IO memory Date: Fri, 20 Oct 2023 12:21:50 +0100 [thread overview] Message-ID: <ZTJizmxV4Gtb4g3S@arm.com> (raw) In-Reply-To: <20231019115142.GQ3952@nvidia.com> On Thu, Oct 19, 2023 at 08:51:42AM -0300, Jason Gunthorpe wrote: > On Thu, Oct 19, 2023 at 12:07:42PM +0100, Catalin Marinas wrote: > > Talking to Will earlier, I think we can deem the PCIe scenario > > (somewhat) safe but not as a generic mechanism for other non-PCIe > > devices (e.g. platform). With this concern, can we make this Stage 2 > > relaxation in KVM only for vfio-pci mappings? I don't have an example of > > non-PCIe device assignment to figure out how this should work though. > > It is not a KVM problem. As I implied above it is VFIO's > responsibility to reliably reset the device, not KVMs. If for some > reason VFIO cannot do that on some SOC then VFIO devices should not > exist. > > It is not KVM's job to double guess VFIO's own security properties. I'd argue that since KVM is the one relaxing the memory attributes beyond what the VFIO driver allows the VMM to use, it is KVM's job to consider the security implications. This is fine for vfio-pci and Normal_NC but I'm not sure we can generalise. > Specifically about platform the generic VFIO platform driver is the > ACPI based one. If the FW provides an ACPI method for device reset > that is not properly serializing, that is a FW bug. We can quirk it in > VFIO and block using those devices if they actually exist. > > I expect the non-generic VFIO platform drivers to take care of this > issue internally with, barriers, read from devices, whatver is > required to make their SOCs order properly. Just as I would expect a > normal Linux platform driver to directly manage whatever > implementation specific ordering quirks the SOC may have. This would be a new requirement if an existing VFIO platform driver relied on all mappings being Device. But maybe that's just theoretical at the moment, are there any concrete examples outside vfio-pci? If not, we can document it as per Lorenzo's suggestion to summarise this discussion under Documentation/. -- Catalin _______________________________________________ linux-arm-kernel mailing list linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2023-10-20 11:22 UTC|newest] Thread overview: 110+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top 2023-09-07 18:14 [PATCH v1 0/2] KVM: arm64: support write combining and cachable IO memory in VMs ankita 2023-09-07 18:14 ` ankita 2023-09-07 18:14 ` [PATCH v1 1/2] KVM: arm64: determine memory type from VMA ankita 2023-09-07 18:14 ` ankita 2023-09-07 19:12 ` Jason Gunthorpe 2023-09-07 19:12 ` Jason Gunthorpe 2023-10-05 16:15 ` Catalin Marinas 2023-10-05 16:15 ` Catalin Marinas 2023-10-05 16:54 ` Jason Gunthorpe 2023-10-05 16:54 ` Jason Gunthorpe 2023-10-10 14:25 ` Catalin Marinas 2023-10-10 14:25 ` Catalin Marinas 2023-10-10 15:05 ` Jason Gunthorpe 2023-10-10 15:05 ` Jason Gunthorpe 2023-10-10 17:19 ` Catalin Marinas 2023-10-10 17:19 ` Catalin Marinas 2023-10-10 18:23 ` Jason Gunthorpe 2023-10-10 18:23 ` Jason Gunthorpe 2023-10-11 17:45 ` Catalin Marinas 2023-10-11 17:45 ` Catalin Marinas 2023-10-11 18:38 ` Jason Gunthorpe 2023-10-11 18:38 ` Jason Gunthorpe 2023-10-12 16:16 ` Catalin Marinas 2023-10-12 16:16 ` Catalin Marinas 2024-03-10 3:49 ` Ankit Agrawal 2024-03-10 3:49 ` Ankit Agrawal 2024-03-19 13:38 ` Jason Gunthorpe 2024-03-19 13:38 ` Jason Gunthorpe 2023-10-23 13:20 ` Shameerali Kolothum Thodi 2023-10-23 13:20 ` Shameerali Kolothum Thodi 2023-09-07 18:14 ` [PATCH v1 2/2] KVM: arm64: allow the VM to select DEVICE_* and NORMAL_NC for IO memory ankita 2023-09-07 18:14 ` ankita 2023-09-08 16:40 ` Catalin Marinas 2023-09-08 16:40 ` Catalin Marinas 2023-09-11 14:57 ` Lorenzo Pieralisi 2023-09-11 14:57 ` Lorenzo Pieralisi 2023-09-11 17:20 ` Jason Gunthorpe 2023-09-11 17:20 ` Jason Gunthorpe 2023-09-13 15:26 ` Lorenzo Pieralisi 2023-09-13 15:26 ` Lorenzo Pieralisi 2023-09-13 18:54 ` Jason Gunthorpe 2023-09-13 18:54 ` Jason Gunthorpe 2023-09-26 8:31 ` Lorenzo Pieralisi 2023-09-26 8:31 ` Lorenzo Pieralisi 2023-09-26 12:25 ` Jason Gunthorpe 2023-09-26 12:25 ` Jason Gunthorpe 2023-09-26 13:52 ` Catalin Marinas 2023-09-26 13:52 ` Catalin Marinas 2023-09-26 16:12 ` Lorenzo Pieralisi 2023-09-26 16:12 ` Lorenzo Pieralisi 2023-10-05 9:56 ` Lorenzo Pieralisi 2023-10-05 9:56 ` Lorenzo Pieralisi 2023-10-05 11:56 ` Jason Gunthorpe 2023-10-05 11:56 ` Jason Gunthorpe 2023-10-05 14:08 ` Lorenzo Pieralisi 2023-10-05 14:08 ` Lorenzo Pieralisi 2023-10-12 12:35 ` Will Deacon 2023-10-12 12:35 ` Will Deacon 2023-10-12 13:20 ` Jason Gunthorpe 2023-10-12 13:20 ` Jason Gunthorpe 2023-10-12 14:29 ` Lorenzo Pieralisi 2023-10-12 14:29 ` Lorenzo Pieralisi 2023-10-12 13:53 ` Catalin Marinas 2023-10-12 13:53 ` Catalin Marinas 2023-10-12 14:48 ` Will Deacon 2023-10-12 14:48 ` Will Deacon 2023-10-12 15:44 ` Jason Gunthorpe 2023-10-12 15:44 ` Jason Gunthorpe 2023-10-12 16:39 ` Will Deacon 2023-10-12 16:39 ` Will Deacon 2023-10-12 18:36 ` Jason Gunthorpe 2023-10-12 18:36 ` Jason Gunthorpe 2023-10-13 9:29 ` Will Deacon 2023-10-13 9:29 ` Will Deacon 2023-10-12 17:26 ` Catalin Marinas 2023-10-12 17:26 ` Catalin Marinas 2023-10-13 9:29 ` Will Deacon 2023-10-13 9:29 ` Will Deacon 2023-10-13 13:08 ` Catalin Marinas 2023-10-13 13:08 ` Catalin Marinas 2023-10-13 13:45 ` Jason Gunthorpe 2023-10-13 13:45 ` Jason Gunthorpe 2023-10-19 11:07 ` Catalin Marinas 2023-10-19 11:07 ` Catalin Marinas 2023-10-19 11:51 ` Jason Gunthorpe 2023-10-19 11:51 ` Jason Gunthorpe 2023-10-20 11:21 ` Catalin Marinas [this message] 2023-10-20 11:21 ` Catalin Marinas 2023-10-20 11:47 ` Jason Gunthorpe 2023-10-20 11:47 ` Jason Gunthorpe 2023-10-20 14:03 ` Lorenzo Pieralisi 2023-10-20 14:03 ` Lorenzo Pieralisi 2023-10-20 14:28 ` Jason Gunthorpe 2023-10-20 14:28 ` Jason Gunthorpe 2023-10-19 13:35 ` Lorenzo Pieralisi 2023-10-19 13:35 ` Lorenzo Pieralisi 2023-10-13 15:28 ` Lorenzo Pieralisi 2023-10-13 15:28 ` Lorenzo Pieralisi 2023-10-19 11:12 ` Catalin Marinas 2023-10-19 11:12 ` Catalin Marinas 2023-11-09 15:34 ` Lorenzo Pieralisi 2023-11-09 15:34 ` Lorenzo Pieralisi 2023-11-10 14:26 ` Jason Gunthorpe 2023-11-10 14:26 ` Jason Gunthorpe 2023-11-13 0:42 ` Lorenzo Pieralisi 2023-11-13 0:42 ` Lorenzo Pieralisi 2023-11-13 17:41 ` Catalin Marinas 2023-11-13 17:41 ` Catalin Marinas 2023-10-12 12:27 ` Will Deacon 2023-10-12 12:27 ` Will Deacon
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=ZTJizmxV4Gtb4g3S@arm.com \ --to=catalin.marinas@arm.com \ --cc=acurrid@nvidia.com \ --cc=aniketa@nvidia.com \ --cc=ankita@nvidia.com \ --cc=apopple@nvidia.com \ --cc=cjia@nvidia.com \ --cc=danw@nvidia.com \ --cc=jgg@nvidia.com \ --cc=jhubbard@nvidia.com \ --cc=kvmarm@lists.linux.dev \ --cc=kwankhede@nvidia.com \ --cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \ --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \ --cc=lpieralisi@kernel.org \ --cc=maz@kernel.org \ --cc=oliver.upton@linux.dev \ --cc=targupta@nvidia.com \ --cc=vsethi@nvidia.com \ --cc=will@kernel.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: linkBe sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes, see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror all data and code used by this external index.