From: Baolu Lu <baolu.lu@linux.intel.com>
To: Robin Murphy <robin.murphy@arm.com>,
"Tian, Kevin" <kevin.tian@intel.com>,
Jacob Pan <jacob.jun.pan@linux.intel.com>,
LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
"iommu@lists.linux.dev" <iommu@lists.linux.dev>,
Joerg Roedel <joro@8bytes.org>
Cc: baolu.lu@linux.intel.com, Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>,
David Woodhouse <dwmw2@infradead.org>,
"Raj, Ashok" <ashok.raj@intel.com>,
"Liu, Yi L" <yi.l.liu@intel.com>,
"Luo, Yuzhang" <yuzhang.luo@intel.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] iommu/vt-d: Add a fix for devices need extra dtlb flush
Date: Thu, 24 Nov 2022 10:52:32 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <992ba86c-73e6-8db0-0216-c2a8b7d1f58f@linux.intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <53678e27-1bbc-a7e8-a1b0-0427fc0e5b62@arm.com>
On 11/23/22 7:32 PM, Robin Murphy wrote:
> On 2022-11-23 05:18, Tian, Kevin wrote:
>>> From: Baolu Lu <baolu.lu@linux.intel.com>
>>> Sent: Wednesday, November 23, 2022 1:04 PM
>>>
>>> On 2022/11/23 9:02, Tian, Kevin wrote:
>>>>> From: Robin Murphy <robin.murphy@arm.com>
>>>>> Sent: Wednesday, November 23, 2022 1:49 AM
>>>>>
>>>>>> +
>>>>>> +/* Impacted QAT device IDs ranging from 0x4940 to 0x4943 */
>>>>>> +#define BUGGY_QAT_DEVID_MASK 0x494c
>>>>>> +static bool dev_needs_extra_dtlb_flush(struct pci_dev *pdev)
>>>>>> +{
>>>>>> + if (pdev->vendor != PCI_VENDOR_ID_INTEL)
>>>>>> + return false;
>>>>>> +
>>>>>> + if ((pdev->device & 0xfffc) != BUGGY_QAT_DEVID_MASK)
>>>>>> + return false;
>>>>>> +
>>>>>> + if (risky_device(pdev))
>>>>>> + return false;
>>>>>
>>>>> Hmm, I'm not sure that that makes much sense to me - what privilege
>>>>> can
>>>>> the device gain from being told to invalidate things twice? Why
>>>>> would we
>>>>> want to implicitly *allow* a device to potentially keep using a stale
>>>>> translation if for some bizarre reason firmware has marked it as
>>>>> external, surely that's worse?
>>>
>>> From the perspective of IOMMU, any quirk is only applicable to trusted
>>> devices. If the IOMMU driver detects that a quirk is being applied to an
>>> untrusted device, it is already buggy or malicious. The IOMMU driver
>>> should let the users know by:
>>>
>>> pci_info(pdev,
>>> "Skipping IOMMU quirk for dev [%04X:%04X] on untrusted
>>> PCI link\n",
>>> pdev->vendor, pdev->device);
>>> pci_info(pdev, "Please check with your BIOS/Platform vendor about
>>> this\n");
>>>
>>> and stop applying any quirk.
>>>
>>
>> A quirk usually relaxes something then you want it only on trusted
>> devices.
>>
>> but the quirk in this patch is trying to fix a vulnerability. In
>> concept it's
>> weird to skip it on untrusted devices. This iiuc was the part causing
>> confusion
>> to Robin.
>
> Right, it's that reasoning in general that seems bogus to me. Clearly
> any quirk that effectively grants additional privileges, like an
> identity mapping quirk, should not be applied to untrusted external
> devices which may be spoofing an affected VID/DID to gain that
> privilege, but not all quirks imply privilege. If, say, a WiFI
> controller needs something innocuous like a DMA alias or address width
> quirk to function correctly, it will still need that regardless of
> whether it's soldered to a motherboard or to a removable expansion card,
> and it would do nobody any good to deny correct functionality based on
> that unnecessary distinction. Yes, I appreciate that in practice many of
> those kind of quirks will be applied in other layers anyway, but I still
> think it's wrong to make a sweeping assumption that all IOMMU-level
> quirks are precious treasure not to be shared with outsiders, rather
> than assess their impact individually. The detriment in this case is
> small (just needless code churn), but even that's still not nothing.
Fair enough. I agreed here.
Can we put some comments here so that people can still easily read the
discussion here after a long time?
Best regards,
baolu
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2022-11-24 2:59 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2022-11-22 3:45 [PATCH] iommu/vt-d: Add a fix for devices need extra dtlb flush Jacob Pan
2022-11-22 16:52 ` Ashok Raj
2022-11-28 16:13 ` Jacob Pan
2022-11-22 17:49 ` Robin Murphy
2022-11-23 1:02 ` Tian, Kevin
2022-11-23 5:03 ` Baolu Lu
2022-11-23 5:18 ` Tian, Kevin
2022-11-23 11:32 ` Robin Murphy
2022-11-24 2:52 ` Baolu Lu [this message]
2022-11-28 16:02 ` Jacob Pan
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=992ba86c-73e6-8db0-0216-c2a8b7d1f58f@linux.intel.com \
--to=baolu.lu@linux.intel.com \
--cc=ashok.raj@intel.com \
--cc=dwmw2@infradead.org \
--cc=iommu@lists.linux.dev \
--cc=jacob.jun.pan@linux.intel.com \
--cc=joro@8bytes.org \
--cc=kevin.tian@intel.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=robin.murphy@arm.com \
--cc=will@kernel.org \
--cc=yi.l.liu@intel.com \
--cc=yuzhang.luo@intel.com \
/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).