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 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0098BC433F5 for ; Thu, 14 Oct 2021 07:04:59 +0000 (UTC) Received: from lists.gnu.org (lists.gnu.org [209.51.188.17]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 85DE8610F8 for ; Thu, 14 Oct 2021 07:04:58 +0000 (UTC) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.4.1 mail.kernel.org 85DE8610F8 Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=none dis=none) header.from=redhat.com Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=nongnu.org Received: from localhost ([::1]:45110 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1maunR-0005gn-Ka for qemu-devel@archiver.kernel.org; Thu, 14 Oct 2021 03:04:57 -0400 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:54264) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1maulP-0003EE-8G for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 14 Oct 2021 03:02:51 -0400 Received: from us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com ([170.10.133.124]:41453) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1maulN-00066C-71 for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 14 Oct 2021 03:02:50 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=redhat.com; s=mimecast20190719; t=1634194968; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: content-transfer-encoding:content-transfer-encoding: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=d1S01grw2ngdkEJ0YAicVY3DzsPYjPDrt6hoE0ljtY0=; b=Jt3PyopLOajHq/LqTxnOzYjh55pwJOji6N4b9GeOTCZpYanr+21LlKKizdtach5ueVkBTL VHUUekYZvKtDC6+AFWrqowKQAHppRwsy7XOhIJ0eBbafoHVZl1qewjAUQB4aBAWyCnRDYf FAxyUTPX/mpH0RLR4z7c/WGJK0Z+hiU= Received: from mail-lf1-f72.google.com (mail-lf1-f72.google.com [209.85.167.72]) (Using TLS) by relay.mimecast.com with ESMTP id us-mta-428-YUHnmGu_PuyYJe2e4BQa-g-1; Thu, 14 Oct 2021 03:02:46 -0400 X-MC-Unique: YUHnmGu_PuyYJe2e4BQa-g-1 Received: by mail-lf1-f72.google.com with SMTP id d12-20020a0565123d0c00b003fdb52f1cdcso1791150lfv.4 for ; Thu, 14 Oct 2021 00:02:46 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc:content-transfer-encoding; bh=d1S01grw2ngdkEJ0YAicVY3DzsPYjPDrt6hoE0ljtY0=; b=odXjTisZLh7R+GzEb/oK+T3MXT36qkg47774YPWQJ+wxErCi7y6WTA2GkOR01V1Cgd fu0vZrZZ7i27lhYcj9yhS0K2EqV8oQ7RtbFnkD4m978mudwiJdb23wcItV4hpdqhwhS9 crUQSKVnRp+nrekUL9qqc2BcwFS13Y/S3396bPQ2yHsJEyg0jq+R1W6KLgIUFOjk0xR8 XVmSDbfgv9xZvLm83MrceuFoRNB+eWCuEz4IEVaZRkuxoTVvFQsC8u9cMR0kuO9reI8L LldwxdgRfl2PteQ4O3+qGvJ2mtdcarC2QbWJT9B8i5ehykszevPlCaPhGt+D/SE7nDOD uMwQ== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM532xBDERzLdy2Y8N46q6+vQZiogn8vxfBwdNYidSb7z5OgV/L4OR LWcMlHuNuzfOIUqTKpoxmXyCHAx4UAo2U0l81eZLOORXLPcfFNnxk8Ltv+wvl4SuS69qUUGRiTy zb5cH3AW/4L9Ddt3yX1zYebWGmzyh0E0= X-Received: by 2002:a05:6512:3d29:: with SMTP id d41mr3684682lfv.481.1634194965170; Thu, 14 Oct 2021 00:02:45 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJx2GzXJhGJxRMaWeavgK4vnAcEQnZsLm1XOr06y9iTnvnRn8g0FhszB1AEK9nWBNyaSFB6fIAgvCrq1e+0fipA= X-Received: by 2002:a05:6512:3d29:: with SMTP id d41mr3684652lfv.481.1634194964831; Thu, 14 Oct 2021 00:02:44 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <20211012140710.804529-1-eperezma@redhat.com> <20211012140710.804529-4-eperezma@redhat.com> In-Reply-To: From: Jason Wang Date: Thu, 14 Oct 2021 15:02:33 +0800 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 3/3] vdpa: Check for iova range at mappings changes To: Eugenio Perez Martin Authentication-Results: relay.mimecast.com; auth=pass smtp.auth=CUSA124A263 smtp.mailfrom=jasowang@redhat.com X-Mimecast-Spam-Score: 0 X-Mimecast-Originator: redhat.com Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Received-SPF: pass client-ip=170.10.133.124; envelope-from=jasowang@redhat.com; helo=us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com X-Spam_score_int: -28 X-Spam_score: -2.9 X-Spam_bar: -- X-Spam_report: (-2.9 / 5.0 requ) BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIMWL_WL_HIGH=-0.049, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2=-0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no X-Spam_action: no action X-BeenThere: qemu-devel@nongnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.23 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Cc: Parav Pandit , "Michael S. Tsirkin" , qemu-devel , virtualization , Stefan Hajnoczi , Eli Cohen , Stefano Garzarella Errors-To: qemu-devel-bounces+qemu-devel=archiver.kernel.org@nongnu.org Sender: "Qemu-devel" On Thu, Oct 14, 2021 at 1:57 PM Eugenio Perez Martin wrote: > > On Thu, Oct 14, 2021 at 5:30 AM Jason Wang wrote: > > > > On Tue, Oct 12, 2021 at 10:07 PM Eugenio P=C3=A9rez wrote: > > > > > > Check vdpa device range before updating memory regions so we don't ad= d > > > any outside of it, and report the invalid change if any. > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Eugenio P=C3=A9rez > > > --- > > > include/hw/virtio/vhost-vdpa.h | 2 ++ > > > hw/virtio/vhost-vdpa.c | 62 +++++++++++++++++++++++++-------= -- > > > hw/virtio/trace-events | 1 + > > > 3 files changed, 49 insertions(+), 16 deletions(-) > > > > > > diff --git a/include/hw/virtio/vhost-vdpa.h b/include/hw/virtio/vhost= -vdpa.h > > > index a8963da2d9..c288cf7ecb 100644 > > > --- a/include/hw/virtio/vhost-vdpa.h > > > +++ b/include/hw/virtio/vhost-vdpa.h > > > @@ -13,6 +13,7 @@ > > > #define HW_VIRTIO_VHOST_VDPA_H > > > > > > #include "hw/virtio/virtio.h" > > > +#include "standard-headers/linux/vhost_types.h" > > > > > > typedef struct VhostVDPAHostNotifier { > > > MemoryRegion mr; > > > @@ -24,6 +25,7 @@ typedef struct vhost_vdpa { > > > uint32_t msg_type; > > > bool iotlb_batch_begin_sent; > > > MemoryListener listener; > > > + struct vhost_vdpa_iova_range iova_range; > > > struct vhost_dev *dev; > > > VhostVDPAHostNotifier notifier[VIRTIO_QUEUE_MAX]; > > > } VhostVDPA; > > > diff --git a/hw/virtio/vhost-vdpa.c b/hw/virtio/vhost-vdpa.c > > > index be7c63b4ba..dbf773d032 100644 > > > --- a/hw/virtio/vhost-vdpa.c > > > +++ b/hw/virtio/vhost-vdpa.c > > > @@ -37,20 +37,34 @@ static Int128 vhost_vdpa_section_end(const Memory= RegionSection *section) > > > return llend; > > > } > > > > > > -static bool vhost_vdpa_listener_skipped_section(MemoryRegionSection = *section) > > > -{ > > > - return (!memory_region_is_ram(section->mr) && > > > - !memory_region_is_iommu(section->mr)) || > > > - memory_region_is_protected(section->mr) || > > > - /* vhost-vDPA doesn't allow MMIO to be mapped */ > > > - memory_region_is_ram_device(section->mr) || > > > - /* > > > - * Sizing an enabled 64-bit BAR can cause spurious mappin= gs to > > > - * addresses in the upper part of the 64-bit address spac= e. These > > > - * are never accessed by the CPU and beyond the address w= idth of > > > - * some IOMMU hardware. TODO: VDPA should tell us the IO= MMU width. > > > - */ > > > - section->offset_within_address_space & (1ULL << 63); > > [1] > > > > +static bool vhost_vdpa_listener_skipped_section(MemoryRegionSection = *section, > > > + uint64_t iova_min, > > > + uint64_t iova_max) > > > +{ > > > + Int128 llend; > > > + > > > + if ((!memory_region_is_ram(section->mr) && > > > + !memory_region_is_iommu(section->mr)) || > > > + memory_region_is_protected(section->mr) || > > > + /* vhost-vDPA doesn't allow MMIO to be mapped */ > > > + memory_region_is_ram_device(section->mr)) { > > > + return true; > > > + } > > > + > > > + if (section->offset_within_address_space < iova_min) { > > > + error_report("RAM section out of device range (min=3D%lu, ad= dr=3D%lu)", > > > + iova_min, section->offset_within_address_space)= ; > > > + return true; > > > + } > > > + > > > + llend =3D vhost_vdpa_section_end(section); > > > + if (int128_gt(llend, int128_make64(iova_max))) { > > > + error_report("RAM section out of device range (max=3D%lu, en= d addr=3D%lu)", > > > + iova_max, int128_get64(llend)); > > > + return true; > > > + } > > > + > > > + return false; > > > } > > > > > > static int vhost_vdpa_dma_map(struct vhost_vdpa *v, hwaddr iova, hwa= ddr size, > > > @@ -162,7 +176,8 @@ static void vhost_vdpa_listener_region_add(Memory= Listener *listener, > > > void *vaddr; > > > int ret; > > > > > > - if (vhost_vdpa_listener_skipped_section(section)) { > > > + if (vhost_vdpa_listener_skipped_section(section, v->iova_range.f= irst, > > > + v->iova_range.last)) { > > > return; > > > } > > > > > > @@ -220,7 +235,8 @@ static void vhost_vdpa_listener_region_del(Memory= Listener *listener, > > > Int128 llend, llsize; > > > int ret; > > > > > > - if (vhost_vdpa_listener_skipped_section(section)) { > > > + if (vhost_vdpa_listener_skipped_section(section, v->iova_range.f= irst, > > > + v->iova_range.last)) { > > > return; > > > } > > > > > > @@ -288,6 +304,19 @@ static void vhost_vdpa_add_status(struct vhost_d= ev *dev, uint8_t status) > > > vhost_vdpa_call(dev, VHOST_VDPA_SET_STATUS, &s); > > > } > > > > > > +static void vhost_vdpa_get_iova_range(struct vhost_vdpa *v) > > > +{ > > > + int ret =3D vhost_vdpa_call(v->dev, VHOST_VDPA_GET_IOVA_RANGE, > > > + &v->iova_range); > > > + if (ret !=3D 0) { > > > + v->iova_range.first =3D 0; > > > + v->iova_range.last =3D MAKE_64BIT_MASK(0, 63); > > > > Nit: > > > > ULLONG_MAX? > > > > It should be ULLONG_MAX >> 1 to match the previous limit [1], I think they don't conflict. We just want to preserve the default iova range as what the kernel did. Kernel will give ULLONG_MAX if get_iova_range() is not implemented by the device? > and > trusting that uint64_t is effectively unsigned long long. I see a 63 > bits mask immediately with MAKE_64BIT_MASK (once I remember the > parameter order), but I find it harder to see it with (ULLONG_MAX >> > 1). > > If you prefer the _MAX options, I would say it is better to stick with > (UINT64_MAX >> 1) or (HWADDR_MAX >> 1), because of this in > CODING_STYLE.rst: > > "If you're using "int" or "long", odds are good that there's a better > type. ...", "In the event that you require a specific width, use a > standard type like int32_t, uint32_t, uint64_t, etc", "Use hwaddr for > guest physical addresses". > > Does it make sense to you? If I was not wrong, we can use UINT64_MAX. Thanks > > Thanks! > > > Others look good. > > > > Thanks > > > > > + } > > > + > > > + trace_vhost_vdpa_get_iova_range(v->dev, v->iova_range.first, > > > + v->iova_range.last); > > > +} > > > + > > > static int vhost_vdpa_init(struct vhost_dev *dev, void *opaque, Erro= r **errp) > > > { > > > struct vhost_vdpa *v; > > > @@ -300,6 +329,7 @@ static int vhost_vdpa_init(struct vhost_dev *dev,= void *opaque, Error **errp) > > > v->listener =3D vhost_vdpa_memory_listener; > > > v->msg_type =3D VHOST_IOTLB_MSG_V2; > > > > > > + vhost_vdpa_get_iova_range(v); > > > vhost_vdpa_add_status(dev, VIRTIO_CONFIG_S_ACKNOWLEDGE | > > > VIRTIO_CONFIG_S_DRIVER); > > > > > > diff --git a/hw/virtio/trace-events b/hw/virtio/trace-events > > > index 8ed19e9d0c..650e521e35 100644 > > > --- a/hw/virtio/trace-events > > > +++ b/hw/virtio/trace-events > > > @@ -52,6 +52,7 @@ vhost_vdpa_set_vring_call(void *dev, unsigned int i= ndex, int fd) "dev: %p index: > > > vhost_vdpa_get_features(void *dev, uint64_t features) "dev: %p featu= res: 0x%"PRIx64 > > > vhost_vdpa_set_owner(void *dev) "dev: %p" > > > vhost_vdpa_vq_get_addr(void *dev, void *vq, uint64_t desc_user_addr,= uint64_t avail_user_addr, uint64_t used_user_addr) "dev: %p vq: %p desc_us= er_addr: 0x%"PRIx64" avail_user_addr: 0x%"PRIx64" used_user_addr: 0x%"PRIx6= 4 > > > +vhost_vdpa_get_iova_range(void *dev, uint64_t first, uint64_t last) = "dev: %p first: 0x%"PRIx64" last: 0x%"PRIx64 > > > > > > # virtio.c > > > virtqueue_alloc_element(void *elem, size_t sz, unsigned in_num, unsi= gned out_num) "elem %p size %zd in_num %u out_num %u" > > > -- > > > 2.27.0 > > > > > >