On 2024/7/1 09:47, Yan Zhao wrote:
On Sun, Jun 30, 2024 at 03:06:05PM +0800, Yi Liu wrote:
On 2024/6/28 23:28, Yan Zhao wrote:
On Fri, Jun 28, 2024 at 05:48:11PM +0800, Yi Liu wrote:
On 2024/6/28 13:21, Yan Zhao wrote:
On Thu, Jun 27, 2024 at 09:42:09AM -0300, Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
On Thu, Jun 27, 2024 at 05:51:01PM +0800, Yan Zhao wrote:
This doesn't seem right.. There is only one device but multiple file
can be opened on that device.
Maybe we can put this assignment to vfio_df_ioctl_bind_iommufd() after
vfio_df_open() makes sure device->open_count is 1.
Yeah, that seems better.
Logically it would be best if all places set the inode once the
inode/FD has been made to be the one and only way to access it.
For group path, I'm afraid there's no such a place ensuring only one active fd
in kernel.
I tried modifying QEMU to allow two openings and two assignments of the same
device. It works and appears to guest that there were 2 devices, though this
ultimately leads to device malfunctions in guest.
BTW, in group path, what's the benefit of allowing multiple open of device?
I don't know, the thing that opened the first FD can just dup it, no
idea why two different FDs would be useful. It is something we removed
in the cdev flow
Thanks. However, from the code, it reads like a drawback of the cdev flow :)
I don't understand why the group path is secure though.
/*
* Only the group path allows the device to be opened multiple
* times. The device cdev path doesn't have a secure way for it.
*/
if (device->open_count != 0 && !df->group)
return -EINVAL;
The group path only allow single group open, so the device FDs retrieved
via the group is just within the opener of the group. This secure is built
on top of single open of group.
What if the group is opened for only once but VFIO_GROUP_GET_DEVICE_FD
ioctl is called for multiple times?
this should happen within the process context that has opened the group. it
should be safe, and that would be tracked by the open_count.
Thanks for explanation.
Even within a single process, for the group path, it appears that accesses to
the multiple opened device fds still require proper synchronization.
this is for sure as they are accessing the same device.
With proper synchronizations, for cdev path, accesses from different processes
can still function correctly.
Additionally, the group fd can also be passed to another process, allowing
device fds to be acquired and accessed from a different process.
I think the secure boundary is within a process. If there are multiple
processes accessing a single device, then the boundary is broken.
On the other hand, cdev path might also support multiple opened fds from a
single process by checking task gid.
The device cdev path simply opts not to do that because it is unnecessary, right?
This is part of the reason. The major reason is that the vfio group can be
compiled out. Without the vfio group, it's a bit complicated to ensure all
the devices within the same iommu group been opened by one user. As no
known usage of it, so we didn't explore it very much. Actually, if multiple
FDs are needed, may be dup() is a choice. Do you have such a need?
Regards,
Yi Liu
