Re: [RFC PATCH] vfio/type1: Do not support IOMMUs that allow bypass

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



[cc +iommu]

On Tue, 2015-10-27 at 15:40 +0000, Will Deacon wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 16, 2015 at 09:51:22AM -0600, Alex Williamson wrote:
> > On Fri, 2015-10-16 at 16:03 +0200, Eric Auger wrote:
> > > Hi Alex,
> > > On 10/15/2015 10:52 PM, Alex Williamson wrote:
> > > > We can only provide isolation if DMA is forced through the IOMMU
> > > > aperture.  Don't allow type1 to be used if this is not the case.
> > > > 
> > > > Signed-off-by: Alex Williamson <alex.williamson@xxxxxxxxxx>
> > > > ---
> > > > 
> > > > Eric, I see a number of IOMMU drivers enable this, do the ones you
> > > > care about for ARM set geometry.force_aperture?  Thanks,
> > > I am currently using arm-smmu.c. I don't see force_aperture being set.
> > 
> > Hi Will,
> 
> Hi Alex,
> 
> > Would it be possible to add iommu_domain_geometry support to arm-smmu.c?
> > In addition to this test to verify that DMA cannot bypass the IOMMU, I'd
> > eventually like to pass the aperture information out through the VFIO
> > API.  Thanks,
> 
> The slight snag here is that we don't know which SMMU in the system the
> domain is attached to at the point when the geometry is queried, so I
> can't give you an upper bound on the aperture. For example, if there is
> an SMMU with a 32-bit input address and another with a 48-bit input
> address.
> 
> We could play the same horrible games that we do with the pgsize bitmap,
> and truncate some global aperture everytime we probe an SMMU device, but
> I'd really like to have fewer hacks like that if possible. The root of
> the problem is still that domains are allocated for a bus, rather than
> an IOMMU instance.

Hi Will,

Yes, Intel VT-d has this issue as well.  In theory we can have
heterogeneous IOMMU hardware units (DRHDs) in a system and the upper
bound of the geometry could be diminished if we add a less capable DRHD
into the domain.  I suspect this is more a theoretical problem than a
practical one though as we're typically mixing similar DRHDs and I think
we're still capable of 39-bit addressing in the least capable version
per the spec.

In any case, I really want to start testing geometry.force_aperture,
even if we're not yet comfortable to expose the IOMMU limits to the
user.  The vfio type1 shouldn't be enabled at all for underlying
hardware that allows DMA bypass.  Thanks,

Alex

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe kvm" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html



[Index of Archives]     [KVM ARM]     [KVM ia64]     [KVM ppc]     [Virtualization Tools]     [Spice Development]     [Libvirt]     [Libvirt Users]     [Linux USB Devel]     [Linux Audio Users]     [Yosemite Questions]     [Linux Kernel]     [Linux SCSI]     [XFree86]
  Powered by Linux