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=-5.3 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,NICE_REPLY_A, SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,USER_AGENT_SANE_1 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 B45D6C433B4 for ; Tue, 18 May 2021 13:59:49 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 915B76117A for ; Tue, 18 May 2021 13:59:49 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1349740AbhEROBF (ORCPT ); Tue, 18 May 2021 10:01:05 -0400 Received: from mx0b-001b2d01.pphosted.com ([148.163.158.5]:13188 "EHLO mx0b-001b2d01.pphosted.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S239860AbhEROBE (ORCPT ); Tue, 18 May 2021 10:01:04 -0400 Received: from pps.filterd (m0127361.ppops.net [127.0.0.1]) by mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com (8.16.0.43/8.16.0.43) with SMTP id 14IDXH3U124602; Tue, 18 May 2021 09:59:43 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=ibm.com; h=subject : to : cc : references : from : message-id : date : mime-version : in-reply-to : content-type : content-transfer-encoding; s=pp1; bh=fn49UZKCJaLFL+buVVdOvj/wTEW1p00qar2oua87Uq4=; b=eehALjAwsgwSs5tnKpQSJz+0tLnKq2wp9IdWFrGAXdtckYsT5S6NP0hNvCt1HzdNZFub hjNX5o0VI3LBTND8zvJ+bfow67JYEMCVRG3ynGC5srWZgE21Sbw1ljhbMZmvSBoLkad8 7caeBOaigEK2ondHaLBJBrcMbbtZkzPbgvRBkC0RSOirqmRmGdEGt9Gf2+N40Ahr7Z3Z u+YZsceDZYsyqem5842vaTlz/MIIB0Cx34Y59va4KZd9r6HG+6uCIGbQ8xXc0sWH+nbF owKXOoXxeYDN3bCWiJCK4/3cFNwiLEhCz48lYlOLel3vlFce8ga6s7qFPRvm6KISZIjj ZA== Received: from pps.reinject (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com with ESMTP id 38mb70qa6d-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Tue, 18 May 2021 09:59:43 -0400 Received: from m0127361.ppops.net (m0127361.ppops.net [127.0.0.1]) by pps.reinject (8.16.0.43/8.16.0.43) with SMTP id 14IDYJV7128453; Tue, 18 May 2021 09:59:42 -0400 Received: from ppma04fra.de.ibm.com (6a.4a.5195.ip4.static.sl-reverse.com [149.81.74.106]) by mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com with ESMTP id 38mb70qa5f-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Tue, 18 May 2021 09:59:42 -0400 Received: from pps.filterd (ppma04fra.de.ibm.com [127.0.0.1]) by ppma04fra.de.ibm.com (8.16.0.43/8.16.0.43) with SMTP id 14IDvYIW014201; Tue, 18 May 2021 13:59:40 GMT Received: from b06cxnps4075.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (d06relay12.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com [9.149.109.197]) by ppma04fra.de.ibm.com with ESMTP id 38j5x80tfg-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Tue, 18 May 2021 13:59:40 +0000 Received: from d06av26.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (d06av26.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com [9.149.105.62]) by b06cxnps4075.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (8.14.9/8.14.9/NCO v10.0) with ESMTP id 14IDxbrh42205454 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=OK); Tue, 18 May 2021 13:59:37 GMT Received: from d06av26.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by IMSVA (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7961CAE053; Tue, 18 May 2021 13:59:37 +0000 (GMT) Received: from d06av26.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by IMSVA (Postfix) with ESMTP id D6147AE045; Tue, 18 May 2021 13:59:36 +0000 (GMT) Received: from oc7455500831.ibm.com (unknown [9.171.42.71]) by d06av26.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (Postfix) with ESMTP; Tue, 18 May 2021 13:59:36 +0000 (GMT) Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] s390/vfio-ap: fix memory leak in mdev remove callback To: Tony Krowiak , Halil Pasic Cc: linux-s390@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, cohuck@redhat.com, pasic@linux.vnet.ibm.com, jjherne@linux.ibm.com, jgg@nvidia.com, alex.williamson@redhat.com, kwankhede@nvidia.com, stable@vger.kernel.org, Tony Krowiak References: <20210510214837.359717-1-akrowiak@linux.ibm.com> <20210512203536.4209c29c.pasic@linux.ibm.com> <4c156ab8-da49-4867-f29c-9712c2628d44@linux.ibm.com> <20210513194541.58d1628a.pasic@linux.ibm.com> <243086e2-08a0-71ed-eb7e-618a62b007e4@linux.ibm.com> <20210514021500.60ad2a22.pasic@linux.ibm.com> <594374f6-8cf6-4c22-0bac-3b224c55bbb6@linux.ibm.com> <20210517211030.368ca64b.pasic@linux.ibm.com> <966a60ad-bdde-68d0-ae2f-06121c6ad970@de.ibm.com> <9ebd5fd8-b093-e5bc-e680-88fa7a9b085c@linux.ibm.com> From: Christian Borntraeger Message-ID: <494af62b-dc9a-ef2c-1869-d8f5ed239504@de.ibm.com> Date: Tue, 18 May 2021 15:59:36 +0200 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:78.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/78.10.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <9ebd5fd8-b093-e5bc-e680-88fa7a9b085c@linux.ibm.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-TM-AS-GCONF: 00 X-Proofpoint-GUID: VnPax_Mvs8Au0dod5q1YofVymtvZfDwK X-Proofpoint-ORIG-GUID: rBhOPXT8o0Gwmu4wxx2jFJo_dmcsiKQu X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=fsecure engine=2.50.10434:6.0.391,18.0.761 definitions=2021-05-18_04:2021-05-18,2021-05-18 signatures=0 X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=outbound_notspam policy=outbound score=0 clxscore=1015 impostorscore=0 priorityscore=1501 lowpriorityscore=0 mlxlogscore=999 phishscore=0 adultscore=0 malwarescore=0 mlxscore=0 suspectscore=0 spamscore=0 bulkscore=0 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=8.12.0-2104190000 definitions=main-2105180096 Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 18.05.21 15:42, Tony Krowiak wrote: > > > On 5/18/21 5:30 AM, Christian Borntraeger wrote: >> >> >> On 17.05.21 21:10, Halil Pasic wrote: >>> On Mon, 17 May 2021 09:37:42 -0400 >>> Tony Krowiak wrote: >>> >>>>> >>>>> Because of this, I don't think the rest of your argument is valid. >>>> >>>> Okay, so your concern is that between the point in time the >>>> vcpu->kvm->arch.crypto.pqap_hook pointer is checked in >>>> priv.c and the point in time the handle_pqap() function >>>> in vfio_ap_ops.c is called, the memory allocated for the >>>> matrix_mdev containing the struct kvm_s390_module_hook >>>> may get freed, thus rendering the function pointer invalid. >>>> While not impossible, that seems extremely unlikely to >>>> happen. Can you articulate a scenario where that could >>>> even occur? >>> >>> Malicious userspace. We tend to do the pqap aqic just once >>> in the guest right after the queue is detected. I do agree >>> it ain't very likely to happen during normal operation. But why are >>> you asking? >> >> Would it help, if the code in priv.c would read the hook once >> and then only work on the copy? We could protect that with rcu >> and do a synchronize rcu in vfio_ap_mdev_unset_kvm after >> unsetting the pointer? > > I'll look into this. I think it could work. in priv.c use rcu_readlock, save the pointer, do the check and call, call rcu_read_unlock. In vfio_ap use rcu_assign_pointer to set the pointer and after setting it to zero call sychronize_rcu. Halil, I think we can do this as an addon patch as it makes sense to have this callback pointer protected independent of this patch. Agree?