From: Michael Kelley <mhklinux@outlook.com>
To: Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>,
"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Cc: "kernel-team@android.com" <kernel-team@android.com>,
"iommu@lists.linux.dev" <iommu@lists.linux.dev>,
Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>,
Marek Szyprowski <m.szyprowski@samsung.com>,
Robin Murphy <robin.murphy@arm.com>,
Petr Tesarik <petr.tesarik1@huawei-partners.com>,
Dexuan Cui <decui@microsoft.com>,
Nicolin Chen <nicolinc@nvidia.com>
Subject: RE: [PATCH v4 5/5] iommu/dma: Force swiotlb_max_mapping_size on an untrusted device
Date: Wed, 21 Feb 2024 23:39:29 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <SN6PR02MB4157828120FB7D3408CEC991D4572@SN6PR02MB4157.namprd02.prod.outlook.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20240221113504.7161-6-will@kernel.org>
From: Will Deacon <will@kernel.org> Sent: Wednesday, February 21, 2024 3:35 AM
>
> The swiotlb does not support a mapping size > swiotlb_max_mapping_size().
> On the other hand, with a 64KB PAGE_SIZE configuration, it's observed that
> an NVME device can map a size between 300KB~512KB, which certainly failed
> the swiotlb mappings, though the default pool of swiotlb has many slots:
> systemd[1]: Started Journal Service.
> => nvme 0000:00:01.0: swiotlb buffer is full (sz: 327680 bytes), total 32768
> (slots), used 32 (slots)
> note: journal-offline[392] exited with irqs disabled
> note: journal-offline[392] exited with preempt_count 1
>
> Call trace:
> [ 3.099918] swiotlb_tbl_map_single+0x214/0x240
> [ 3.099921] iommu_dma_map_page+0x218/0x328
> [ 3.099928] dma_map_page_attrs+0x2e8/0x3a0
> [ 3.101985] nvme_prep_rq.part.0+0x408/0x878 [nvme]
> [ 3.102308] nvme_queue_rqs+0xc0/0x300 [nvme]
> [ 3.102313] blk_mq_flush_plug_list.part.0+0x57c/0x600
> [ 3.102321] blk_add_rq_to_plug+0x180/0x2a0
> [ 3.102323] blk_mq_submit_bio+0x4c8/0x6b8
> [ 3.103463] __submit_bio+0x44/0x220
> [ 3.103468] submit_bio_noacct_nocheck+0x2b8/0x360
> [ 3.103470] submit_bio_noacct+0x180/0x6c8
> [ 3.103471] submit_bio+0x34/0x130
> [ 3.103473] ext4_bio_write_folio+0x5a4/0x8c8
> [ 3.104766] mpage_submit_folio+0xa0/0x100
> [ 3.104769] mpage_map_and_submit_buffers+0x1a4/0x400
> [ 3.104771] ext4_do_writepages+0x6a0/0xd78
> [ 3.105615] ext4_writepages+0x80/0x118
> [ 3.105616] do_writepages+0x90/0x1e8
> [ 3.105619] filemap_fdatawrite_wbc+0x94/0xe0
> [ 3.105622] __filemap_fdatawrite_range+0x68/0xb8
> [ 3.106656] file_write_and_wait_range+0x84/0x120
> [ 3.106658] ext4_sync_file+0x7c/0x4c0
> [ 3.106660] vfs_fsync_range+0x3c/0xa8
> [ 3.106663] do_fsync+0x44/0xc0
>
> Since untrusted devices might go down the swiotlb pathway with dma-iommu,
> these devices should not map a size larger than swiotlb_max_mapping_size.
>
> To fix this bug, add iommu_dma_max_mapping_size() for untrusted devices to
> take into account swiotlb_max_mapping_size() v.s. iova_rcache_range() from
> the iommu_dma_opt_mapping_size().
>
> Fixes: 82612d66d51d ("iommu: Allow the dma-iommu api to use bounce buffers")
> Signed-off-by: Nicolin Chen <nicolinc@nvidia.com>
> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/all/ee51a3a5c32cf885b18f6416171802669f4a718a.1707851466.git.nicolinc@nvidia.com/
> Signed-off-by: Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>
> ---
> drivers/iommu/dma-iommu.c | 8 ++++++++
> 1 file changed, 8 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/iommu/dma-iommu.c b/drivers/iommu/dma-iommu.c
> index 50ccc4f1ef81..7d1a20da6d94 100644
> --- a/drivers/iommu/dma-iommu.c
> +++ b/drivers/iommu/dma-iommu.c
> @@ -1706,6 +1706,13 @@ static size_t
> iommu_dma_opt_mapping_size(void)
> return iova_rcache_range();
> }
>
> +static size_t iommu_dma_max_mapping_size(struct device *dev)
> +{
> + if (is_swiotlb_active(dev) && dev_is_untrusted(dev))
> + return swiotlb_max_mapping_size(dev);
> + return SIZE_MAX;
> +}
> +
In this [1] email, Nicolin had a version of this function that incorporated
the IOMMU granule. For granules bigger than 4K, I think that's needed
so that when IOMMU code sets the swiotlb alloc_align_mask to the
IOMMU granule - 1, the larger offset plus the size won't exceed the
max number of slots. swiotlb_max_mapping_size() by itself may
return a value that's too big when alloc_align_mask is used.
Michael
[1] https://lore.kernel.org/linux-iommu/SN6PR02MB415727E61B5295C259CCB268D4512@SN6PR02MB4157.namprd02.prod.outlook.com/T/#m14dd359c5a4dd13e6cb0c35cf94f8d746257ae48
> static const struct dma_map_ops iommu_dma_ops = {
> .flags = DMA_F_PCI_P2PDMA_SUPPORTED,
> .alloc = iommu_dma_alloc,
> @@ -1728,6 +1735,7 @@ static const struct dma_map_ops iommu_dma_ops = {
> .unmap_resource = iommu_dma_unmap_resource,
> .get_merge_boundary = iommu_dma_get_merge_boundary,
> .opt_mapping_size = iommu_dma_opt_mapping_size,
> + .max_mapping_size = iommu_dma_max_mapping_size,
> };
>
> /*
> --
> 2.44.0.rc0.258.g7320e95886-goog
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2024-02-21 23:39 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 27+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2024-02-21 11:34 [PATCH v4 0/5] Fix double allocation in swiotlb_alloc() Will Deacon
2024-02-21 11:35 ` [PATCH v4 1/5] swiotlb: Fix double-allocation of slots due to broken alignment handling Will Deacon
2024-02-21 23:35 ` Michael Kelley
2024-02-23 12:47 ` Will Deacon
2024-02-23 13:36 ` Petr Tesařík
2024-02-23 17:04 ` Michael Kelley
2024-02-27 15:38 ` Christoph Hellwig
2024-02-21 11:35 ` [PATCH v4 2/5] swiotlb: Enforce page alignment in swiotlb_alloc() Will Deacon
2024-02-21 23:36 ` Michael Kelley
2024-02-21 11:35 ` [PATCH v4 3/5] swiotlb: Honour dma_alloc_coherent() " Will Deacon
2024-02-21 23:36 ` Michael Kelley
2024-02-21 11:35 ` [PATCH v4 4/5] swiotlb: Fix alignment checks when both allocation and DMA masks are present Will Deacon
2024-02-21 23:37 ` Michael Kelley
2024-02-21 11:35 ` [PATCH v4 5/5] iommu/dma: Force swiotlb_max_mapping_size on an untrusted device Will Deacon
2024-02-21 23:39 ` Michael Kelley [this message]
2024-02-23 19:58 ` Nicolin Chen
2024-02-23 21:10 ` Michael Kelley
2024-02-25 21:17 ` Michael Kelley
2024-02-26 19:35 ` Robin Murphy
2024-02-26 21:11 ` Michael Kelley
2024-02-27 13:22 ` Robin Murphy
2024-02-27 14:30 ` Michael Kelley
2024-02-27 15:40 ` Christoph Hellwig
2024-02-27 15:53 ` Robin Murphy
2024-02-28 12:05 ` Will Deacon
2024-02-23 11:34 ` [PATCH v4 0/5] Fix double allocation in swiotlb_alloc() Nicolin Chen
2024-02-23 12:25 ` Will Deacon
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=SN6PR02MB4157828120FB7D3408CEC991D4572@SN6PR02MB4157.namprd02.prod.outlook.com \
--to=mhklinux@outlook.com \
--cc=decui@microsoft.com \
--cc=hch@lst.de \
--cc=iommu@lists.linux.dev \
--cc=kernel-team@android.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=m.szyprowski@samsung.com \
--cc=nicolinc@nvidia.com \
--cc=petr.tesarik1@huawei-partners.com \
--cc=robin.murphy@arm.com \
--cc=will@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).