xen-devel.lists.xenproject.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Oleksandr Andrushchenko <Oleksandr_Andrushchenko@epam.com>
To: Jan Beulich <jbeulich@suse.com>
Cc: "julien@xen.org" <julien@xen.org>,
	"sstabellini@kernel.org" <sstabellini@kernel.org>,
	Oleksandr Tyshchenko <Oleksandr_Tyshchenko@epam.com>,
	Volodymyr Babchuk <Volodymyr_Babchuk@epam.com>,
	Artem Mygaiev <Artem_Mygaiev@epam.com>,
	"andrew.cooper3@citrix.com" <andrew.cooper3@citrix.com>,
	"george.dunlap@citrix.com" <george.dunlap@citrix.com>,
	"paul@xen.org" <paul@xen.org>,
	Bertrand Marquis <bertrand.marquis@arm.com>,
	Rahul Singh <rahul.singh@arm.com>,
	"xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org" <xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org>,
	"roger.pau@citrix.com" <roger.pau@citrix.com>,
	Oleksandr Andrushchenko <Oleksandr_Andrushchenko@epam.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v6 05/13] vpci: add hooks for PCI device assign/de-assign
Date: Tue, 8 Feb 2022 10:52:22 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <15022045-bc92-e3df-b005-aeec5e36a078@epam.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <10cd89b5-a804-3354-26d8-bc271bd9c5e6@suse.com>



On 08.02.22 12:29, Jan Beulich wrote:
> On 08.02.2022 11:22, Oleksandr Andrushchenko wrote:
>>
>> On 08.02.22 12:09, Jan Beulich wrote:
>>> On 08.02.2022 10:55, Oleksandr Andrushchenko wrote:
>>>> On 08.02.22 11:44, Jan Beulich wrote:
>>>>> On 08.02.2022 10:27, Oleksandr Andrushchenko wrote:
>>>>>> On 08.02.22 11:13, Jan Beulich wrote:
>>>>>>> On 08.02.2022 09:32, Oleksandr Andrushchenko wrote:
>>>>>>>> On 07.02.22 18:28, Jan Beulich wrote:
>>>>>>>>> On 04.02.2022 07:34, Oleksandr Andrushchenko wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> @@ -1507,6 +1511,8 @@ static int assign_device(struct domain *d, u16 seg, u8 bus, u8 devfn, u32 flag)
>>>>>>>>>>                               pci_to_dev(pdev), flag);
>>>>>>>>>>           }
>>>>>>>>>>       
>>>>>>>>>> +    rc = vpci_assign_device(d, pdev);
>>>>>>>>>> +
>>>>>>>>>>        done:
>>>>>>>>>>           if ( rc )
>>>>>>>>>>               printk(XENLOG_G_WARNING "%pd: assign (%pp) failed (%d)\n",
>>>>>>>>> There's no attempt to undo anything in the case of getting back an
>>>>>>>>> error. ISTR this being deemed okay on the basis that the tool stack
>>>>>>>>> would then take whatever action, but whatever it is that is supposed
>>>>>>>>> to deal with errors here wants spelling out in the description.
>>>>>>>> Why? I don't change the previously expected decision and implementation
>>>>>>>> of the assign_device function: I use error paths as they were used before
>>>>>>>> for the existing code. So, I see no clear reason to stress that the existing
>>>>>>>> and new code relies on the toolstack
>>>>>>> Saying half a sentence on this is helping review.
>>>>>> Ok
>>>>>>>>> What's important is that no caller up the call tree may be left with
>>>>>>>>> the impression that the device is still owned by the original
>>>>>>>>> domain. With how you have it, the device is going to be owned by the
>>>>>>>>> new domain, but not really usable.
>>>>>>>> This is not true: vpci_assign_device will call vpci_deassign_device
>>>>>>>> internally if it fails. So, the device won't be assigned in this case
>>>>>>> No. The device is assigned to whatever pdev->domain holds. Calling
>>>>>>> vpci_deassign_device() there merely makes sure that the device will
>>>>>>> have _no_ vPCI data and hooks in place, rather than something
>>>>>>> partial.
>>>>>> So, this patch is only dealing with vpci assign/de-assign
>>>>>> And it rolls back what it did in case of a failure
>>>>>> It also returns rc in assign_device to signal it has failed
>>>>>> What else is expected from this patch??
>>>>> Until now if assign_device() returns an error, this tells the caller
>>>>> that the device did not change ownership;
>>>> Not sure this is the case:
>>>>        if ( (rc = iommu_call(hd->platform_ops, assign_device, d, devfn,
>>>>                              pci_to_dev(pdev), flag)) )
>>>> iommu_call can leave the new ownership even now without
>>>> vpci_assign_device.
>>> Did you check the actual hook functions for when exactly the ownership
>>> change happens. For both VT-d and AMD it is the last thing they do,
>>> when no error can occur anymore.
>> This functionality does not exist for Arm yet, so this is up to the
>> future series to add that.
>>
>> WRT to the existing code:
>>
>> static int amd_iommu_assign_device(struct domain *d, u8 devfn,
>>                                      struct pci_dev *pdev,
>>                                      u32 flag)
>> {
>>       if ( !rc )
>>           rc = reassign_device(pdev->domain, d, devfn, pdev); <<<<< this will set pdev->domain
>>
>>       if ( rc && !is_hardware_domain(d) )
>>       {
>>           int ret = amd_iommu_reserve_domain_unity_unmap(
>>                         d, ivrs_mappings[req_id].unity_map);
>>
>>           if ( ret )
>>           {
>>               printk(XENLOG_ERR "AMD-Vi: "
>>                      "unity-unmap for %pd/%04x:%02x:%02x.%u failed (%d)\n",
>>                      d, pdev->seg, pdev->bus,
>>                      PCI_SLOT(devfn), PCI_FUNC(devfn), ret);
>>               domain_crash(d);
>>           }
>> So....
>>
>> This is IMO wrong in the first place to let IOMMU code assign pdev->domain.
>> This is something that needs to be done by the PCI code itself and
>> not relying on each IOMMU callback implementation
>>>    My understanding is that the roll-back is
>>>> expected to be performed by the toolstack and vpci_assign_device
>>>> doesn't prevent that by returning rc. Even more, before we discussed
>>>> that it would be good for vpci_assign_device to try recovering from
>>>> a possible error early which is done by calling vpci_deassign_device
>>>> internally.
>>> Yes, but that's only part of it. It at least needs considering what
>>> effects have resulted from operations prior to vpci_assign_device().
>> Taking into account the code snippet above: what is your expectation
>> from this patch with this respect?
> You did note the domain_crash() in there, didn't you?
Which is AMD specific implementation which can be different for
other IOMMUs. Yes, I did.
> The snippet above
> still matches the "device not assigned to an alive DomU" criteria (which
> can be translated to "no exposure of a device to an untrusted entity in
> case of error"). Such domain_crash() uses aren't nice, and I'd prefer to
> see them go away, but said property needs to be retained with any
> alternative solutions.
This smells like we first need to fix the existing code, so
pdev->domain is not assigned by specific IOMMU implementations,
but instead controlled by the code which relies on that, assign_device.

I can have something like:

diff --git a/xen/drivers/passthrough/pci.c b/xen/drivers/passthrough/pci.c
index 88836aab6baf..cc7790709a50 100644
--- a/xen/drivers/passthrough/pci.c
+++ b/xen/drivers/passthrough/pci.c
@@ -1475,6 +1475,7 @@ static int device_assigned(u16 seg, u8 bus, u8 devfn)
  static int assign_device(struct domain *d, u16 seg, u8 bus, u8 devfn, u32 flag)
  {
      const struct domain_iommu *hd = dom_iommu(d);
+    struct domain *old_owner;
      struct pci_dev *pdev;
      int rc = 0;

@@ -1490,6 +1491,9 @@ static int assign_device(struct domain *d, u16 seg, u8 bus, u8 devfn, u32 flag)
      ASSERT(pdev && (pdev->domain == hardware_domain ||
                      pdev->domain == dom_io));

+    /* We need to restore the old owner in case of an error. */
+    old_owner = pdev->domain;
+
      vpci_deassign_device(pdev->domain, pdev);

      rc = pdev_msix_assign(d, pdev);
@@ -1515,8 +1519,12 @@ static int assign_device(struct domain *d, u16 seg, u8 bus, u8 devfn, u32 flag)

   done:
      if ( rc )
+    {
          printk(XENLOG_G_WARNING "%pd: assign (%pp) failed (%d)\n",
                 d, &PCI_SBDF3(seg, bus, devfn), rc);
+        /* We failed to assign, so restore the previous owner. */
+        pdev->domain = old_owner;
+    }
      /* The device is assigned to dom_io so mark it as quarantined */
      else if ( d == dom_io )
          pdev->quarantine = true;

But I do not think this belongs to this patch
>
> Jan
>
Thank you,
Oleksandr

  reply	other threads:[~2022-02-08 10:52 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 138+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2022-02-04  6:34 [PATCH v6 00/13] PCI devices passthrough on Arm, part 3 Oleksandr Andrushchenko
2022-02-04  6:34 ` [PATCH v6 01/13] xen/pci: arm: add stub for is_memory_hole Oleksandr Andrushchenko
2022-02-04  8:51   ` Julien Grall
2022-02-04  9:01     ` Oleksandr Andrushchenko
2022-02-04  9:41       ` Julien Grall
2022-02-04  9:47         ` Oleksandr Andrushchenko
2022-02-04  9:57           ` Julien Grall
2022-02-04 10:35             ` Oleksandr Andrushchenko
2022-02-04 11:00               ` Julien Grall
2022-02-04 11:25                 ` Oleksandr Andrushchenko
2022-02-04  6:34 ` [PATCH v6 02/13] rangeset: add RANGESETF_no_print flag Oleksandr Andrushchenko
2022-02-04  6:34 ` [PATCH v6 03/13] vpci: move lock outside of struct vpci Oleksandr Andrushchenko
2022-02-04  7:52   ` Jan Beulich
2022-02-04  8:13     ` Oleksandr Andrushchenko
2022-02-04  8:36       ` Jan Beulich
2022-02-04  8:58     ` Oleksandr Andrushchenko
2022-02-04  9:15       ` Jan Beulich
2022-02-04 10:12         ` Oleksandr Andrushchenko
2022-02-04 10:49           ` Jan Beulich
2022-02-04 11:13             ` Roger Pau Monné
2022-02-04 11:37               ` Jan Beulich
2022-02-04 12:37                 ` Oleksandr Andrushchenko
2022-02-04 12:47                   ` Jan Beulich
2022-02-04 12:53                     ` Oleksandr Andrushchenko
2022-02-04 13:03                       ` Jan Beulich
2022-02-04 13:06                       ` Roger Pau Monné
2022-02-04 14:43                         ` Oleksandr Andrushchenko
2022-02-04 14:57                           ` Roger Pau Monné
2022-02-07 11:08                             ` Oleksandr Andrushchenko
2022-02-07 12:34                               ` Jan Beulich
2022-02-07 12:57                                 ` Oleksandr Andrushchenko
2022-02-07 13:02                                   ` Jan Beulich
2022-02-07 12:46                               ` Roger Pau Monné
2022-02-07 13:53                                 ` Oleksandr Andrushchenko
2022-02-07 14:11                                   ` Jan Beulich
2022-02-07 14:27                                     ` Roger Pau Monné
2022-02-07 14:33                                       ` Jan Beulich
2022-02-07 14:35                                       ` Oleksandr Andrushchenko
2022-02-07 15:11                                         ` Oleksandr Andrushchenko
2022-02-07 15:26                                           ` Jan Beulich
2022-02-07 16:07                                             ` Oleksandr Andrushchenko
2022-02-07 16:15                                               ` Jan Beulich
2022-02-07 16:21                                                 ` Oleksandr Andrushchenko
2022-02-07 16:37                                                   ` Jan Beulich
2022-02-07 16:44                                                     ` Oleksandr Andrushchenko
2022-02-08  7:35                                                       ` Oleksandr Andrushchenko
2022-02-08  8:57                                                         ` Jan Beulich
2022-02-08  9:03                                                           ` Oleksandr Andrushchenko
2022-02-08 10:50                                                         ` Roger Pau Monné
2022-02-08 11:13                                                           ` Oleksandr Andrushchenko
2022-02-08 13:38                                                             ` Roger Pau Monné
2022-02-08 13:52                                                               ` Oleksandr Andrushchenko
2022-02-08  8:53                                                       ` Jan Beulich
2022-02-08  9:00                                                         ` Oleksandr Andrushchenko
2022-02-08 10:11                                                     ` Roger Pau Monné
2022-02-08 10:32                                                       ` Oleksandr Andrushchenko
2022-02-07 16:08                                             ` Roger Pau Monné
2022-02-07 16:12                                               ` Jan Beulich
2022-02-07 14:28                                     ` Oleksandr Andrushchenko
2022-02-07 14:19                                   ` Roger Pau Monné
2022-02-07 14:27                                     ` Oleksandr Andrushchenko
2022-02-04 11:37               ` Oleksandr Andrushchenko
2022-02-04 12:15                 ` Roger Pau Monné
2022-02-04 10:57           ` Roger Pau Monné
2022-02-04  6:34 ` [PATCH v6 04/13] vpci: restrict unhandled read/write operations for guests Oleksandr Andrushchenko
2022-02-04 14:11   ` Jan Beulich
2022-02-04 14:24     ` Oleksandr Andrushchenko
2022-02-08  8:00       ` Oleksandr Andrushchenko
2022-02-08  9:04         ` Jan Beulich
2022-02-08  9:09           ` Oleksandr Andrushchenko
2022-02-08  9:05         ` Roger Pau Monné
2022-02-08  9:10           ` Oleksandr Andrushchenko
2022-02-04  6:34 ` [PATCH v6 05/13] vpci: add hooks for PCI device assign/de-assign Oleksandr Andrushchenko
2022-02-07 16:28   ` Jan Beulich
2022-02-08  8:32     ` Oleksandr Andrushchenko
2022-02-08  9:13       ` Jan Beulich
2022-02-08  9:27         ` Oleksandr Andrushchenko
2022-02-08  9:44           ` Jan Beulich
2022-02-08  9:55             ` Oleksandr Andrushchenko
2022-02-08 10:09               ` Jan Beulich
2022-02-08 10:22                 ` Oleksandr Andrushchenko
2022-02-08 10:29                   ` Jan Beulich
2022-02-08 10:52                     ` Oleksandr Andrushchenko [this message]
2022-02-08 11:00                       ` Jan Beulich
2022-02-08 11:25                         ` Oleksandr Andrushchenko
2022-02-10  8:21                           ` Oleksandr Andrushchenko
2022-02-10  9:22                             ` Jan Beulich
2022-02-10  9:33                               ` Oleksandr Andrushchenko
2022-02-04  6:34 ` [PATCH v6 06/13] vpci/header: implement guest BAR register handlers Oleksandr Andrushchenko
2022-02-07 17:06   ` Jan Beulich
2022-02-08  8:06     ` Oleksandr Andrushchenko
2022-02-08  9:16       ` Jan Beulich
2022-02-08  9:29         ` Roger Pau Monné
2022-02-08  9:25   ` Roger Pau Monné
2022-02-08  9:31     ` Oleksandr Andrushchenko
2022-02-08  9:48       ` Jan Beulich
2022-02-08  9:57         ` Oleksandr Andrushchenko
2022-02-08 10:15           ` Jan Beulich
2022-02-08 10:29             ` Oleksandr Andrushchenko
2022-02-08 13:58               ` Roger Pau Monné
2022-02-04  6:34 ` [PATCH v6 07/13] vpci/header: handle p2m range sets per BAR Oleksandr Andrushchenko
2022-02-04  6:34 ` [PATCH v6 08/13] vpci/header: program p2m with guest BAR view Oleksandr Andrushchenko
2022-02-04  6:34 ` [PATCH v6 09/13] vpci/header: emulate PCI_COMMAND register for guests Oleksandr Andrushchenko
2022-02-04 14:25   ` Jan Beulich
2022-02-08  8:13     ` Oleksandr Andrushchenko
2022-02-08  9:33       ` Jan Beulich
2022-02-08  9:38         ` Oleksandr Andrushchenko
2022-02-08  9:52           ` Jan Beulich
2022-02-08  9:58             ` Oleksandr Andrushchenko
2022-02-08 11:11               ` Roger Pau Monné
2022-02-08 11:29                 ` Oleksandr Andrushchenko
2022-02-08 14:09                   ` Roger Pau Monné
2022-02-08 14:13                     ` Oleksandr Andrushchenko
2022-02-04  6:34 ` [PATCH v6 10/13] vpci/header: reset the command register when adding devices Oleksandr Andrushchenko
2022-02-04 14:30   ` Jan Beulich
2022-02-04 14:37     ` Oleksandr Andrushchenko
2022-02-07  7:29       ` Jan Beulich
2022-02-07 11:27         ` Oleksandr Andrushchenko
2022-02-07 12:38           ` Jan Beulich
2022-02-07 12:51             ` Oleksandr Andrushchenko
2022-02-07 12:54               ` Jan Beulich
2022-02-07 14:17                 ` Oleksandr Andrushchenko
2022-02-07 14:31                   ` Jan Beulich
2022-02-07 14:46                     ` Oleksandr Andrushchenko
2022-02-07 15:05                       ` Jan Beulich
2022-02-07 15:14                         ` Oleksandr Andrushchenko
2022-02-07 15:28                           ` Jan Beulich
2022-02-07 15:59                             ` Oleksandr Andrushchenko
2022-02-10 12:54                     ` Oleksandr Andrushchenko
2022-02-10 13:36                       ` Jan Beulich
2022-02-10 13:56                         ` Oleksandr Andrushchenko
2022-02-10 12:59                     ` Oleksandr Andrushchenko
2022-02-04  6:34 ` [PATCH v6 11/13] vpci: add initial support for virtual PCI bus topology Oleksandr Andrushchenko
2022-02-04  6:34 ` [PATCH v6 12/13] xen/arm: translate virtual PCI bus topology for guests Oleksandr Andrushchenko
2022-02-04  7:56   ` Jan Beulich
2022-02-04  8:18     ` Oleksandr Andrushchenko
2022-02-04  6:34 ` [PATCH v6 13/13] xen/arm: account IO handlers for emulated PCI MSI-X Oleksandr Andrushchenko
2022-02-11 15:28   ` Julien Grall

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=15022045-bc92-e3df-b005-aeec5e36a078@epam.com \
    --to=oleksandr_andrushchenko@epam.com \
    --cc=Artem_Mygaiev@epam.com \
    --cc=Oleksandr_Tyshchenko@epam.com \
    --cc=Volodymyr_Babchuk@epam.com \
    --cc=andrew.cooper3@citrix.com \
    --cc=bertrand.marquis@arm.com \
    --cc=george.dunlap@citrix.com \
    --cc=jbeulich@suse.com \
    --cc=julien@xen.org \
    --cc=paul@xen.org \
    --cc=rahul.singh@arm.com \
    --cc=roger.pau@citrix.com \
    --cc=sstabellini@kernel.org \
    --cc=xen-devel@lists.xenproject.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).