On Fri, Oct 01, 2021 at 09:21:25AM +0200, Halil Pasic wrote: > On Thu, 30 Sep 2021 07:12:21 -0400 > "Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > On Thu, Sep 30, 2021 at 03:20:49AM +0200, Halil Pasic wrote: > > > This patch fixes a regression introduced by commit 82e89ea077b9 > > > ("virtio-blk: Add validation for block size in config space") and > > > enables similar checks in verify() on big endian platforms. > > > > > > The problem with checking multi-byte config fields in the verify > > > callback, on big endian platforms, and with a possibly transitional > > > device is the following. The verify() callback is called between > > > config->get_features() and virtio_finalize_features(). That we have a > > > device that offered F_VERSION_1 then we have the following options > > > either the device is transitional, and then it has to present the legacy > > > interface, i.e. a big endian config space until F_VERSION_1 is > > > negotiated, or we have a non-transitional device, which makes > > > F_VERSION_1 mandatory, and only implements the non-legacy interface and > > > thus presents a little endian config space. Because at this point we > > > can't know if the device is transitional or non-transitional, we can't > > > know do we need to byte swap or not. > > > > Hmm which transport does this refer to? > > It is the same with virtio-ccw and virtio-pci. I see the same problem > with both on s390x. I didn't try with virtio-blk-pci-non-transitional > yet (have to figure out how to do that with libvirt) for pci I used > virtio-blk-pci. > > > Distinguishing between legacy and modern drivers is transport > > specific. PCI presents > > legacy and modern at separate addresses so distinguishing > > between these two should be no trouble. > > You mean the device id? Yes that is bolted down in the spec, but > currently we don't exploit that information. Furthermore there > is a fat chance that with QEMU even the allegedly non-transitional > devices only present a little endian config space after VERSION_1 > was negotiated. Namely get_config for virtio-blk is implemented in > virtio_blk_update_config() which does virtio_stl_p(vdev, > &blkcfg.blk_size, blk_size) and in there we don't care > about transitional or not: > > static inline bool virtio_access_is_big_endian(VirtIODevice *vdev) > { > #if defined(LEGACY_VIRTIO_IS_BIENDIAN) > return virtio_is_big_endian(vdev); > #elif defined(TARGET_WORDS_BIGENDIAN) > if (virtio_vdev_has_feature(vdev, VIRTIO_F_VERSION_1)) { > /* Devices conforming to VIRTIO 1.0 or later are always LE. */ > return false; > } > return true; > #else > return false; > #endif > } > ok so that's a QEMU bug. Any virtio 1.0 and up compatible device must use LE. It can also present a legacy config space where the endian depends on the guest. > > Channel i/o has versioning so same thing? > > > > Don't think so. Both a transitional and a non-transitional device > would have to accept revisions higher than 0 if the driver tried to > negotiate those (and we do in our case). Yes, the modern driver does. And that one is known to be LE. legacy driver doesn't. > > > The virtio spec explicitly states that the driver MAY read config > > > between reading and writing the features so saying that first accessing > > > the config before feature negotiation is done is not an option. The > > > specification ain't clear about setting the features multiple times > > > before FEATURES_OK, so I guess that should be fine. > > > > > > I don't consider this patch super clean, but frankly I don't think we > > > have a ton of options. Another option that may or man not be cleaner, > > > but is also IMHO much uglier is to figure out whether the device is > > > transitional by rejecting _F_VERSION_1, then resetting it and proceeding > > > according tho what we have figured out, hoping that the characteristics > > > of the device didn't change. > > > > I am confused here. So is the problem at the device or at the driver level? > > We have a driver regression. Since the 82e89ea077b9 ("virtio-blk: Add > validation for block size in config space") virtio-blk is broken on > s390. Because of a qemu bug. I agree. It's worth working around in the driver since the qemu bug has been around for a very long time. > The deeper problem is in the spec. We stated that the driver may read > config space before the feature negotiation is finalized, but we didn't > think enough about what happens when native endiannes is not little > endian in the different cases. Because the spec is very clear that endian-ness is LE. I don't see a spec issue yet here, just an implementation issue. > I believe, for non-transitional devices we have a problem in the host as > well (i.e. in QEMU). Because QEMU ignores the spec and instead relies on the feature negotiation. > > > I suspect it's actually the host that has the issue, not > > the guest? > > I tend to say we have a problem both in the host and in the guest. I'm > more concerned about the problem in the guest, because that is a really > nasty regression. The problem is in the guest. The bug is in the host ;) > For the host. I think for legacy we don't have a > problem, because both sides would operate on the assumption no > _F_VERSION_1, IMHO the implementation for the transitional devices is > correct. Well no, the point of transitional is really to be 1.0 compliant *and* also expose a legacy interface. > For non-transitional flavor, it depends on the device. For > example virtio-net and virtio-blk is broken, because we use primitives > like virtio_stl_p() and those don't do the right thing before feature > negotiation is completed. On the other hand virtio-crypto.c as a truly > non-transitional device uses stl_le_p() and IMHO does the right thing. > > Thanks for your comments! I hope I managed to answer your questions. I > need some guidance on how do we want to move forward on this. > > Regards, > Halil OK so. I don't have a problem with the patch itself, assuming it's enough to work around all buggy hosts. I am especially worried about things like vhost/vhost-user, I suspect they might have a bug like this too, and I am not sure whether your work around is enough for these. Can you check please? If not we'll have to move all validate code to after FEATURES_OK is set. We do however want to document that this API can be called multiple times since that was not the case previously. Also, I would limit this to when - the validate callback exists - the guest endian-ness is not LE We also want to document the QEMU bug in a comment here, e.g. /* * QEMU before version 6.2 incorrectly uses driver features with guest * endian-ness to set endian-ness for config space instead of just using * LE for the modern interface as per spec. * This breaks reading config in the validate callback. * To work around that, when device is 1.0 (so supposed to be LE) * but guest is not LE, then send the features to device one extra * time before validation. */ Finally I'd like to see the QEMU bug fix before I merge this one, since it will be harder to test with a fix. > > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Halil Pasic <pasic@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> > > > Fixes: 82e89ea077b9 ("virtio-blk: Add validation for block size in config space") > > > Reported-by: markver@xxxxxxxxxx > > > --- > > > drivers/virtio/virtio.c | 4 ++++ > > > 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+) > > > > > > diff --git a/drivers/virtio/virtio.c b/drivers/virtio/virtio.c > > > index 0a5b54034d4b..9dc3cfa17b1c 100644 > > > --- a/drivers/virtio/virtio.c > > > +++ b/drivers/virtio/virtio.c > > > @@ -249,6 +249,10 @@ static int virtio_dev_probe(struct device *_d) > > > if (device_features & (1ULL << i)) > > > __virtio_set_bit(dev, i); > > > > > > + /* Write back features before validate to know endianness */ > > > + if (device_features & (1ULL << VIRTIO_F_VERSION_1)) > > > + dev->config->finalize_features(dev); > > > + > > > if (drv->validate) { > > > err = drv->validate(dev); > > > if (err) > > > > > > base-commit: 02d5e016800d082058b3d3b7c3ede136cdc6ddcb > > > -- > > > 2.25.1 > > _______________________________________________ Virtualization mailing list Virtualization@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/virtualization