Re: [PATCH 1/2] KVM: arm64: vgic: Forbid invalid userspace Redistributor accesses

From: Auger Eric <eric.auger@redhat.com>
To: Marc Zyngier <maz@kernel.org>, Zenghui Yu <yuzenghui@huawei.com>
Cc: kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu,
	linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, james.morse@arm.com,
	julien.thierry.kdev@gmail.com, suzuki.poulose@arm.com,
	wanghaibin.wang@huawei.com, Keqian Zhu <zhukeqian1@huawei.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] KVM: arm64: vgic: Forbid invalid userspace Redistributor accesses
Date: Tue, 17 Nov 2020 10:47:12 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <ea719c25-911e-345a-61fa-648d2f01ab4a@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <c20865a267e44d1e2c0d52ce4e012263@kernel.org>

Hi Zenghui,

On 11/17/20 9:49 AM, Marc Zyngier wrote:
> Hi Zenghui,
> 
> On 2020-11-16 14:57, Zenghui Yu wrote:
>> Hi Marc,
>>
>> On 2020/11/16 22:10, Marc Zyngier wrote:
>>>> My take is that only if the "[Re]Distributor base address" is specified
>>>> in the system memory map, will the user-provided kvm_device_attr.offset
>>>> make sense. And we can then handle the access to the register which is
>>>> defined by "base address + offset".
>>>
>>> I'd tend to agree, but it is just that this is a large change at -rc4.
>>> I'd rather have a quick fix for 5.10, and a more invasive change for
>>> 5.11,
>>> spanning all the possible vgic devices.
>>
>> So you prefer fixing it by "return a value that doesn't have the Last
>> bit set" for v5.10? I'm ok with it and can send v2 for it.
> 
> Cool. Thanks for that.
> 
>> Btw, looking again at the way we handle the user-reading of GICR_TYPER
>>
>>     vgic_mmio_read_v3r_typer(vcpu, addr, len)
>>
>> it seems that @addr is actually the *offset* of GICR_TYPER (0x0008) and
>> @addr is unlikely to be equal to last_rdist_typer, which is the *GPA* of
>> the last RD. Looks like the user-reading of GICR_TYPER.Last is always
>> broken?
> 
> I think you are right. Somehow, we don't seem to track the index of
> the RD in the region, so we can never compute the address of the RD
> even if the base address is set.
> 
> Let's drop the reporting of Last for userspace for now, as it never
> worked. If you post a patch addressing that quickly, I'll get it to
> Paolo by the end of the week (there's another fix that needs merging).
> 
> Eric: do we have any test covering the userspace API?
No, there are no KVM selftests for that yet.

Thanks

Eric

> 
> Thanks,
> 
>         M.