From: Pierre Morel <pmorel@linux.ibm.com>
To: "Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@redhat.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, pasic@linux.ibm.com,
borntraeger@de.ibm.com, frankja@linux.ibm.com,
jasowang@redhat.com, cohuck@redhat.com, kvm@vger.kernel.org,
linux-s390@vger.kernel.org,
virtualization@lists.linux-foundation.org,
thomas.lendacky@amd.com, david@gibson.dropbear.id.au,
linuxram@us.ibm.com, heiko.carstens@de.ibm.com,
gor@linux.ibm.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 1/1] s390: virtio: let arch accept devices without IOMMU feature
Date: Mon, 29 Jun 2020 18:48:28 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <66f808f2-5dd9-9127-d0e8-6bafbf13fc62@linux.ibm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20200629115952-mutt-send-email-mst@kernel.org>
On 2020-06-29 18:09, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 17, 2020 at 12:43:57PM +0200, Pierre Morel wrote:
>> An architecture protecting the guest memory against unauthorized host
>> access may want to enforce VIRTIO I/O device protection through the
>> use of VIRTIO_F_IOMMU_PLATFORM.
>> Let's give a chance to the architecture to accept or not devices
>> without VIRTIO_F_IOMMU_PLATFORM.
>
> I agree it's a bit misleading. Protection is enforced by memory
> encryption, you can't trust the hypervisor to report the bit correctly
> so using that as a securoty measure would be pointless.
> The real gain here is that broken configs are easier to
> debug.
>
> Here's an attempt at a better description:
>
> On some architectures, guest knows that VIRTIO_F_IOMMU_PLATFORM is
> required for virtio to function: e.g. this is the case on s390 protected
> virt guests, since otherwise guest passes encrypted guest memory to devices,
> which the device can't read. Without VIRTIO_F_IOMMU_PLATFORM the
> result is that affected memory (or even a whole page containing
> it is corrupted). Detect and fail probe instead - that is easier
> to debug.
Thanks indeed better aside from the "encrypted guest memory": the
mechanism used to avoid the access to the guest memory from the host by
s390 is not encryption but a hardware feature denying the general host
access and allowing pieces of memory to be shared between guest and host.
As a consequence the data read from memory is not corrupted but not read
at all and the read error kills the hypervizor with a SIGSEGV.
>
> however, now that we have described what it is (hypervisor
> misconfiguration) I ask a question: can we be sure this will never
> ever work? E.g. what if some future hypervisor gains ability to
> access the protected guest memory in some abstractly secure manner?
The goal of the s390 PV feature is to avoid this possibility so I don't
think so; however, there is a possibility that some hardware VIRTIO
device gain access to the guest's protected memory, even such device
does not exist yet.
At the moment such device exists we will need a driver for it, at least
to enable the feature and apply policies, it is also one of the reasons
why a hook to the architecture is interesting.
> We are blocking this here, and it's hard to predict the future,
> and a broken hypervisor can always find ways to crash the guest ...
yes, this is also something to fix on the hypervizor side, Halil is
working on it.
>
> IMHO it would be safer to just print a warning.
> What do you think?
Sadly, putting a warning may not help as qemu is killed if it accesses
the protected memory.
Also note that the crash occurs not only on start but also on hotplug.
Thanks,
Pierre
--
Pierre Morel
IBM Lab Boeblingen
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2020-06-29 18:55 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 25+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2020-06-17 10:43 [PATCH v3 0/1] s390: virtio: let arch choose to accept devices without IOMMU feature Pierre Morel
2020-06-17 10:43 ` [PATCH v3 1/1] s390: virtio: let arch " Pierre Morel
2020-06-17 11:22 ` Heiko Carstens
2020-06-17 11:59 ` Pierre Morel
2020-06-17 13:36 ` Tom Lendacky
2020-06-17 14:12 ` Pierre Morel
2020-06-17 22:29 ` Halil Pasic
2020-06-19 9:20 ` Cornelia Huck
2020-06-19 12:02 ` Halil Pasic
2020-06-29 13:15 ` Pierre Morel
2020-06-29 13:14 ` Pierre Morel
2020-06-29 13:44 ` Cornelia Huck
2020-06-29 16:10 ` Pierre Morel
2020-06-29 13:21 ` Pierre Morel
2020-06-29 15:57 ` Michael S. Tsirkin
2020-06-29 16:05 ` Cornelia Huck
2020-07-02 13:03 ` Pierre Morel
2020-07-06 13:37 ` Pierre Morel
2020-07-06 14:33 ` Cornelia Huck
2020-07-06 15:01 ` Pierre Morel
2020-06-29 16:09 ` Pierre Morel
2020-06-29 16:09 ` Michael S. Tsirkin
2020-06-29 16:48 ` Pierre Morel [this message]
2020-06-29 21:18 ` Michael S. Tsirkin
2020-06-30 7:08 ` Cornelia Huck
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=66f808f2-5dd9-9127-d0e8-6bafbf13fc62@linux.ibm.com \
--to=pmorel@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=borntraeger@de.ibm.com \
--cc=cohuck@redhat.com \
--cc=david@gibson.dropbear.id.au \
--cc=frankja@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=gor@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=heiko.carstens@de.ibm.com \
--cc=jasowang@redhat.com \
--cc=kvm@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-s390@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linuxram@us.ibm.com \
--cc=mst@redhat.com \
--cc=pasic@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=thomas.lendacky@amd.com \
--cc=virtualization@lists.linux-foundation.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).