On Tue, 10 Apr 2018 09:19:26 -0600
Alex Williamson <alex.williamson@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Tue, 10 Apr 2018 16:18:59 +0800
> Yulei Zhang <yulei.zhang@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> > Corresponding to the V4 migration patch set for vfio pci device,
> > this patch is to implement the new ioctl VFIO_IOMMU_GET_DIRTY_BITMAP
> > to fulfill the requirement for vfio-mdev device live migration, which
> > need copy the memory that has been pinned in iommu container to the
> > target VM for mdev device status restore.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Yulei Zhang <yulei.zhang@xxxxxxxxx>
> > ---
> > drivers/vfio/vfio_iommu_type1.c | 42 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> > include/uapi/linux/vfio.h | 14 ++++++++++++++
> > 2 files changed, 56 insertions(+)
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/vfio/vfio_iommu_type1.c b/drivers/vfio/vfio_iommu_type1.c
> > index 5c212bf..6cd2142 100644
> > --- a/drivers/vfio/vfio_iommu_type1.c
> > +++ b/drivers/vfio/vfio_iommu_type1.c
> > @@ -41,6 +41,7 @@
> > #include <linux/notifier.h>
> > #include <linux/dma-iommu.h>
> > #include <linux/irqdomain.h>
> > +#include <linux/vmalloc.h>
> >
> > #define DRIVER_VERSION "0.2"
> > #define DRIVER_AUTHOR "Alex Williamson <alex.williamson@xxxxxxxxxx>"
> > @@ -1658,6 +1659,23 @@ static int vfio_domains_have_iommu_cache(struct vfio_iommu *iommu)
> > return ret;
> > }
> >
> > +static void vfio_dma_update_dirty_bitmap(struct vfio_iommu *iommu,
> > + u64 start_addr, u64 npage, void *bitmap)
> > +{
> > + u64 iova = start_addr;
> > + struct vfio_dma *dma;
> > + int i;
> > +
> > + for (i = 0; i < npage; i++) {
> > + dma = vfio_find_dma(iommu, iova, PAGE_SIZE);
> > + if (dma)
> > + if (vfio_find_vpfn(dma, iova))
> > + set_bit(i, bitmap);
>
> This seems to conflate the vendor driver working data set with the
> dirty data set, is that valid?
Additionally, this is invalid for directly assigned devices, it would
indicate all memory is clean. Remember, userspace can't tell the
difference between an mdev device and directly assigned device, you're
relying on the user correlating and mdev device region to assess the
validity of a container ioctl. That's a big leap. If the vfio_dma is
iommu_mapped, the ioctl should return either a full populated bitmap or
an error, returning an empty bitmap is clearly incorrect. Thanks,
Alex
> > +
> > + iova += PAGE_SIZE;
> > + }
> > +}
> > +
> > static long vfio_iommu_type1_ioctl(void *iommu_data,
> > unsigned int cmd, unsigned long arg)
> > {
> > @@ -1728,6 +1746,30 @@ static long vfio_iommu_type1_ioctl(void *iommu_data,
> >
> > return copy_to_user((void __user *)arg, &unmap, minsz) ?
> > -EFAULT : 0;
> > + } else if (cmd == VFIO_IOMMU_GET_DIRTY_BITMAP) {
> > + struct vfio_iommu_get_dirty_bitmap d;
> > + unsigned long bitmap_sz;
> > + unsigned int *bitmap;
> > +
> > + minsz = offsetofend(struct vfio_iommu_get_dirty_bitmap,
> > + page_nr);
> > +
> > + if (copy_from_user(&d, (void __user *)arg, minsz))
> > + return -EFAULT;
> > +
> > + bitmap_sz = (BITS_TO_LONGS(d.page_nr) + 1) *
> > + sizeof(unsigned long);
> > + bitmap = vzalloc(bitmap_sz);
>
> This is an exploit waiting to happen, a kernel allocation based on a
> user provided field with no limit or bounds checking.
>
> > + vfio_dma_update_dirty_bitmap(iommu, d.start_addr,
> > + d.page_nr, bitmap);
> > +
> > + if (copy_to_user((void __user *)arg + minsz,
> > + bitmap, bitmap_sz)) {
> > + vfree(bitmap);
> > + return -EFAULT;
> > + }
> > + vfree(bitmap);
> > + return 0;
> > }
> >
> > return -ENOTTY;
> > diff --git a/include/uapi/linux/vfio.h b/include/uapi/linux/vfio.h
> > index 1aa7b82..d4fd5af 100644
> > --- a/include/uapi/linux/vfio.h
> > +++ b/include/uapi/linux/vfio.h
> > @@ -665,6 +665,20 @@ struct vfio_iommu_type1_dma_unmap {
> > #define VFIO_IOMMU_ENABLE _IO(VFIO_TYPE, VFIO_BASE + 15)
> > #define VFIO_IOMMU_DISABLE _IO(VFIO_TYPE, VFIO_BASE + 16)
> >
> > +/**
> > + * VFIO_IOMMU_GET_DIRTY_BITMAP - _IOW(VFIO_TYPE, VFIO_BASE + 17,
> > + * struct vfio_iommu_get_dirty_bitmap)
> > + *
> > + * Return: 0 on success, -errno on failure.
> > + */
> > +struct vfio_iommu_get_dirty_bitmap {
> > + __u64 start_addr;
> > + __u64 page_nr;
> > + __u8 dirty_bitmap[];
> > +};
>
> This does not follow the vfio standard calling convention of argsz and
> flags. Do we even an ioctl here or could we use a region for exposing
> a dirty bitmap?
>
> Juan, any input on better options than bitmaps? Thanks,
>
> Alex
>
> > +
> > +#define VFIO_IOMMU_GET_DIRTY_BITMAP _IO(VFIO_TYPE, VFIO_BASE + 17)
> > +
> > /* -------- Additional API for SPAPR TCE (Server POWERPC) IOMMU -------- */
> >
> > /*
>
