From: Bjorn Helgaas <helgaas@kernel.org>
To: Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@ffwll.ch>
Cc: "Dan Williams" <dan.j.williams@intel.com>,
"DRI Development" <dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org>,
LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
"KVM list" <kvm@vger.kernel.org>, "Linux MM" <linux-mm@kvack.org>,
"Linux ARM" <linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>,
linux-samsung-soc <linux-samsung-soc@vger.kernel.org>,
"Linux-media@vger.kernel.org" <linux-media@vger.kernel.org>,
"Daniel Vetter" <daniel.vetter@intel.com>,
"Jason Gunthorpe" <jgg@ziepe.ca>,
"Kees Cook" <keescook@chromium.org>,
"Andrew Morton" <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
"John Hubbard" <jhubbard@nvidia.com>,
"Jérôme Glisse" <jglisse@redhat.com>, "Jan Kara" <jack@suse.cz>,
"Bjorn Helgaas" <bhelgaas@google.com>,
"Linux PCI" <linux-pci@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 11/15] PCI: Obey iomem restrictions for procfs mmap
Date: Wed, 4 Nov 2020 10:50:17 -0600 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20201104165017.GA352206@bjorn-Precision-5520> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAKMK7uF0QjesaNs97N-G8cZkXuAmFgcmTfHvoCP94br_WVcV6Q@mail.gmail.com>
On Wed, Nov 04, 2020 at 09:44:04AM +0100, Daniel Vetter wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 3, 2020 at 11:09 PM Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@intel.com> wrote:
> > On Tue, Nov 3, 2020 at 1:28 PM Bjorn Helgaas <helgaas@kernel.org> wrote:
> > > On Fri, Oct 30, 2020 at 11:08:11AM +0100, Daniel Vetter wrote:
> > > > There's three ways to access PCI BARs from userspace: /dev/mem, sysfs
> > > > files, and the old proc interface. Two check against
> > > > iomem_is_exclusive, proc never did. And with CONFIG_IO_STRICT_DEVMEM,
> > > > this starts to matter, since we don't want random userspace having
> > > > access to PCI BARs while a driver is loaded and using it.
> > > >
> > > > Fix this by adding the same iomem_is_exclusive() check we already have
> > > > on the sysfs side in pci_mmap_resource().
> > > >
> > > > References: 90a545e98126 ("restrict /dev/mem to idle io memory ranges")
> > > > Signed-off-by: Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@intel.com>
> > >
> > > This is OK with me but it looks like IORESOURCE_EXCLUSIVE is currently
> > > only used in a few places:
> > >
> > > e1000_probe() calls pci_request_selected_regions_exclusive(),
> > > ne_pci_probe() calls pci_request_regions_exclusive(),
> > > vmbus_allocate_mmio() calls request_mem_region_exclusive()
> > >
> > > which raises the question of whether it's worth keeping
> > > IORESOURCE_EXCLUSIVE at all. I'm totally fine with removing it
> > > completely.
> >
> > Now that CONFIG_IO_STRICT_DEVMEM upgrades IORESOURCE_BUSY to
> > IORESOURCE_EXCLUSIVE semantics the latter has lost its meaning so I'd
> > be in favor of removing it as well.
>
> Still has some value since it enforces exclusive access even if the
> config isn't enabled, and iirc e1000 had some fun with userspace tools
> clobbering the firmware and bricking the chip.
There's *some* value; I'm just skeptical since only three drivers use
it.
IORESOURCE_EXCLUSIVE is from e8de1481fd71 ("resource: allow MMIO
exclusivity for device drivers"), and the commit message says this is
only active when CONFIG_STRICT_DEVMEM is set. I didn't check to see
whether that's still true.
That commit adds a bunch of wrappers and "__"-prefixed functions to
pass the IORESOURCE_EXCLUSIVE flag around. That's a fair bit of
uglification for three drivers.
> Another thing I kinda wondered, since pci maintainer is here: At least
> in drivers/gpu I see very few drivers explicitly requestion regions
> (this might be a historical artifact due to the shadow attach stuff
> before we had real modesetting drivers). And pci core doesn't do that
> either, even when a driver is bound. Is this intentional, or
> should/could we do better? Since drivers work happily without
> reserving regions I don't think "the drivers need to remember to do
> this" will ever really work out well.
You're right, many drivers don't call pci_request_regions(). Maybe we
could do better, but I haven't looked into that recently. There is a
related note in Documentation/PCI/pci.rst that's been there for a long
time (it refers to "pci_request_resources()", which has never existed
AFAICT). I'm certainly open to proposals.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2020-11-04 16:51 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
[not found] <20201030100815.2269-1-daniel.vetter@ffwll.ch>
2020-10-30 10:08 ` [PATCH v5 11/15] PCI: Obey iomem restrictions for procfs mmap Daniel Vetter
2020-11-03 21:28 ` Bjorn Helgaas
2020-11-03 22:09 ` Dan Williams
2020-11-04 8:44 ` Daniel Vetter
2020-11-04 16:50 ` Bjorn Helgaas [this message]
2020-11-04 20:12 ` Dan Williams
2020-11-05 9:34 ` Daniel Vetter
2020-10-30 10:08 ` [PATCH v5 14/15] sysfs: Support zapping of binary attr mmaps Daniel Vetter
2020-10-30 10:08 ` [PATCH v5 15/15] PCI: Revoke mappings like devmem Daniel Vetter
2020-10-30 19:22 ` Dan Williams
2020-11-03 21:30 ` Bjorn Helgaas
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=20201104165017.GA352206@bjorn-Precision-5520 \
--to=helgaas@kernel.org \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=bhelgaas@google.com \
--cc=dan.j.williams@intel.com \
--cc=daniel.vetter@ffwll.ch \
--cc=daniel.vetter@intel.com \
--cc=dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org \
--cc=jack@suse.cz \
--cc=jgg@ziepe.ca \
--cc=jglisse@redhat.com \
--cc=jhubbard@nvidia.com \
--cc=keescook@chromium.org \
--cc=kvm@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-media@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=linux-pci@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-samsung-soc@vger.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: 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).