From: Baolin Wang <baolin.wang@linaro.org>
To: Takashi Iwai <tiwai@suse.de>
Cc: Jaroslav Kysela <perex@perex.cz>, Leo Yan <leo.yan@linaro.org>,
Mark Brown <broonie@kernel.org>,
alsa-devel@alsa-project.org, Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>,
Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org>,
bgoswami@codeaurora.org, sr@denx.de, gustavo@embeddedor.com,
Phil Burk <philburk@google.com>,
Matthew Wilcox <willy@infradead.org>,
mchehab+samsung@kernel.org, sboyd@kernel.org,
Vinod Koul <vkoul@kernel.org>,
Daniel Thompson <daniel.thompson@linaro.org>,
Mathieu Poirier <mathieu.poirier@linaro.org>,
Srinivas Kandagatla <srinivas.kandagatla@linaro.org>,
anna-maria@linutronix.de, Jon Corbet <corbet@lwn.net>,
Jeffery Miller <jmiller@neverware.com>,
Charles Keepax <ckeepax@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com>,
joe@perches.com, Takashi Sakamoto <o-takashi@sakamocchi.jp>,
colyli@suse.de, LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH] ALSA: core: Add DMA share buffer support
Date: Fri, 25 Jan 2019 19:11:43 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAMz4ku+h0HM4zmdb_a83gkW5EfVo24z74d7NQBSD8u8zdzaRUQ@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <s5h1s51120e.wl-tiwai@suse.de>
Hi Takashi,
On Fri, 25 Jan 2019 at 18:10, Takashi Iwai <tiwai@suse.de> wrote:
>
> On Fri, 25 Jan 2019 10:25:37 +0100,
> Baolin Wang wrote:
> >
> > Hi Jaroslav,
> > On Thu, 24 Jan 2019 at 21:43, Jaroslav Kysela <perex@perex.cz> wrote:
> > >
> > > Dne 23.1.2019 v 13:46 Leo Yan napsal(a):
> > > > Hi all,
> > > >
> > > > On Wed, Jan 23, 2019 at 12:58:51PM +0100, Takashi Iwai wrote:
> > > >> On Tue, 22 Jan 2019 21:25:35 +0100,
> > > >> Mark Brown wrote:
> > > >>>
> > > >>> On Mon, Jan 21, 2019 at 03:15:43PM +0100, Jaroslav Kysela wrote:
> > > >>>> Dne 21.1.2019 v 13:40 Mark Brown napsal(a):
> > > >>>
> > > >>>>> It was the bit about adding more extended permission control that I was
> > > >>>>> worried about there, not the initial O_APPEND bit. Indeed the O_APPEND
> > > >>>>> bit sounds like it might also work from the base buffer sharing point of
> > > >>>>> view, I have to confess I'd not heard of that feature before (it didn't
> > > >>>>> come up in the discussion when Eric raised this in Prague).
> > > >>>
> > > >>>> With permissions, I meant to make possible to restrict the file
> > > >>>> descriptor operations (ioctls) for the depending task (like access to
> > > >>>> the DMA buffer, synchronize it for the non-coherent platforms and maybe
> > > >>>> read/write the actual position, delay etc.). It should be relatively
> > > >>>> easy to implement using the snd_pcm_file structure.
> > > >>>
> > > >>> Right, that's what I understood you to mean. If you want to have a
> > > >>> policy saying "it's OK to export a PCM file descriptor if it's only got
> > > >>> permissions X and Y" the security module is going to need to know about
> > > >>> the mechanism for setting those permissions. With dma_buf that's all a
> > > >>> bit easier as there's less new stuff, though I've no real idea how much
> > > >>> of a big deal that actually is.
> > > >>
> > > >> There are many ways to implement such a thing, yeah. If we'd need an
> > > >> implementation that is done solely in the sound driver layer, I can
> > > >> imagine to introduce either a new ioctl or an open flag (like O_EXCL)
> > > >> to specify the restricted sharing. That is, a kind of master / slave
> > > >> model where only the master is allowed to manipulate the stream while
> > > >> the slave can mmap, read/write and get status.
> > > >
> > > > In order to support EXCLUSIVE mode, it is necessary to convert the
> > > > /dev/snd/ descriptor to an anon_inode:dmabuffer file descriptor.
> > > > SELinux allows that file descriptor to be passed to the client. It can
> > > > also be used by the AAudioService.
> > >
> > > Okay, so this is probably the only point which we should resolve for the
> > > already available DMA buffer sharing in ALSA (the O_APPEND flag).
> > >
> > > I had another glance to your dma-buf implementation and I see many
> > > things which might cause problems:
> > >
> > > - allow to call dma-buf ioctls only when the audio device is in specific
> > > state (stream is not running)
> >
> > Right. Will fix.
> >
> > > - as Takashi mentioned, if we return another file-descriptor (dma-buf
> > > export) to the user space and the server closes the main pcm
> > > file-descriptor (the client does not) - the result will be a crash (dma
> > > buffer will be freed, but referenced through the dma-buf interface)
> >
> > Yes, will fix.
>
> There are a few more overlooked problems. A part of them was already
> mentioned in my previous reply, but let me repeat:
>
> - The racy ioctls have to be considered; you can perform this export
> ioctl concurrently, and both of them write and mix up the setup,
> which is obviously broken.
Yes, I think I missed the snd_pcm_stream_lock, and will add.
>
> - The PCM buffer can be re-allocated on the fly. If the current
> buffer is abandoned while exporting, it leads to the UAF.
So I need some validation to check if the buffer is available now when
exporting it.
>
> - Similarly, what if the PCM stream that is attached is closed without
> detaching itself? Or, what if the PCM stream attaches itself twice
We will detach it automatically in snd_pcm_free_stream()
> without detaching?
Sure, need add validation for this case.
>
> - The driver may provide its own mmap method, and you can't hard-code
> the mmap implementation as currently in snd_pcm_dmabuf_mmap().
>
> I suppose you can drop of most of the code in snd_pcm_dmabuf_map(),
> instead, assign PCM substream in obj, and call snd_pcm_mmap_data()
> with the given VMA. If this really works, it manages the mmap
> refcount, so the previous two issues should be covered there.
> But it needs more consideration...
Ah, I think I missed the snd_pcm_mmap_data() function. Yes, so I can
remove the implementation in snd_pcm_dmabuf_map().
>
> - What happens to the PCM buffer that has been allocated before
> attaching, if it's not the pre-allocated one?
> It should be released properly beforehand, otherwise leaks.
I am not sure I understood you correctly. If the PCM buffer has been
allocated, the platform driver should handle it? Since we always use
substream->dma_buffer.
>
> - There is no validation of the attached dma-buf pages; most drivers
> set coherent DMA mask, and they rely on it. e.g. if a page over the
> DMA mask is passed, it will break silently.
Sorry maybe I did not get your point here. We have validate the
dma_map_sg_attr() funtion, in this fucntion it will validate the DMA
mask by dma_capable().
>
> - Some drivers don't use the standard memory pages but keep their own
> hardware buffer (e.g. rme96 or rm32 driver). This ioctl would be
> completely broken on such hardware.
> That is, we need some sanity check whether the PCM allows the
> arbitrary dma-buf or not.
Make sense. Need add some validation to make sure if this PCM can export or not.
Very appreciated for your useful comments.
--
Baolin Wang
Best Regards
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2019-01-25 11:12 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 24+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2019-01-18 4:55 [RFC PATCH] ALSA: core: Add DMA share buffer support Baolin Wang
2019-01-18 9:35 ` Jaroslav Kysela
2019-01-18 19:08 ` Mark Brown
2019-01-18 19:39 ` Takashi Iwai
2019-01-21 12:40 ` Mark Brown
2019-01-21 14:15 ` Jaroslav Kysela
2019-01-22 20:25 ` Mark Brown
2019-01-23 11:58 ` Takashi Iwai
2019-01-23 12:46 ` Leo Yan
2019-01-24 13:43 ` Jaroslav Kysela
2019-01-24 17:33 ` Mark Brown
2019-01-25 9:25 ` Baolin Wang
2019-01-25 10:10 ` Takashi Iwai
2019-01-25 10:20 ` Takashi Iwai
2019-01-25 11:24 ` Baolin Wang
2019-01-25 13:04 ` Takashi Iwai
2019-01-28 5:48 ` Baolin Wang
2019-01-25 11:11 ` Baolin Wang [this message]
2019-01-25 13:03 ` Takashi Iwai
2019-01-28 5:47 ` Baolin Wang
2019-01-25 13:19 ` [alsa-devel] " Takashi Iwai
2019-01-25 18:25 ` Mark Brown
2019-01-28 13:31 ` Jaroslav Kysela
2019-01-28 14:14 ` Takashi Iwai
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=CAMz4ku+h0HM4zmdb_a83gkW5EfVo24z74d7NQBSD8u8zdzaRUQ@mail.gmail.com \
--to=baolin.wang@linaro.org \
--cc=alsa-devel@alsa-project.org \
--cc=anna-maria@linutronix.de \
--cc=arnd@arndb.de \
--cc=bgoswami@codeaurora.org \
--cc=broonie@kernel.org \
--cc=ckeepax@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com \
--cc=colyli@suse.de \
--cc=corbet@lwn.net \
--cc=daniel.thompson@linaro.org \
--cc=gustavo@embeddedor.com \
--cc=jmiller@neverware.com \
--cc=joe@perches.com \
--cc=keescook@chromium.org \
--cc=leo.yan@linaro.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mathieu.poirier@linaro.org \
--cc=mchehab+samsung@kernel.org \
--cc=o-takashi@sakamocchi.jp \
--cc=perex@perex.cz \
--cc=philburk@google.com \
--cc=sboyd@kernel.org \
--cc=sr@denx.de \
--cc=srinivas.kandagatla@linaro.org \
--cc=tiwai@suse.de \
--cc=vkoul@kernel.org \
--cc=willy@infradead.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).