Hi Dmitry,
On Wed, Jan 19, 2022 at 6:25 PM Dmitry Torokhov <dtor@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> Hi Rajat,
>
> On Wed, Jan 19, 2022 at 4:04 PM Rajat Jain <rajatja@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >
> > Today the pci_dev->untrusted is set for any devices sitting downstream
> > an external facing port (determined via "ExternalFacingPort" property).
> > This however, disallows any internal devices to be marked as untrusted.
> >
> > There are use-cases though, where a platform would like to treat an
> > internal device as untrusted (perhaps because it runs untrusted
> > firmware, or offers an attack surface by handling untrusted network
> > data etc).
> >
> > This patch introduces a new "UntrustedDevice" property that can be used
> > by the firmware to mark any device as untrusted.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Rajat Jain <rajatja@xxxxxxxxxx>
> > ---
> > drivers/pci/pci-acpi.c | 13 +++++++++++++
> > 1 file changed, 13 insertions(+)
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/pci/pci-acpi.c b/drivers/pci/pci-acpi.c
> > index a42dbf448860..3d9e5fa49451 100644
> > --- a/drivers/pci/pci-acpi.c
> > +++ b/drivers/pci/pci-acpi.c
> > @@ -1350,12 +1350,25 @@ static void pci_acpi_set_external_facing(struct pci_dev *dev)
> > dev->external_facing = 1;
> > }
> >
> > +static void pci_acpi_set_untrusted(struct pci_dev *dev)
> > +{
> > + u8 val;
> > +
> > + if (device_property_read_u8(&dev->dev, "UntrustedDevice", &val))
> > + return;
> > +
> > + /* These PCI devices are not trustworthy */
> > + if (val)
> > + dev->untrusted = 1;
>
> Should this all be replaced with:
>
> dev->untrusted = device_property_read_bool(&dev->dev, "UntrustedDevice");
The device_property_read_bool() seems to be merely checking for
property presence (and ignoring its value).
I checked with our BIOS / ACPI team. Per them, the ACPI properties
always have a value associated with them.
So if I switch to device_property_read_bool(), "UntrustedDevice"
property with a value of "0" in ACPI shall be marked as an untrusted
device by the kernel. I understand that this may be a confusing corner
case of bad ACPI, but I was thinking it may be better to use the ACPI
value also in the kernel to decide. Thus I think the use of
device_property_read_u8() (the current code) may be better. WDYT?
Thanks & Best Regards,
Rajat
>
> ?
>
> Also, is this ACPI-specific? Why won't we need this for DT systems (or
> do we already have this)?.
>
> Thanks,
> Dmitry
