Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67;
Date:   Thu, 2 Aug 2018 20:19:41 +0300
From:   "Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@redhat.com>
To:     Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@kernel.crashing.org>
Cc:     Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>,
        Will Deacon <will.deacon@arm.com>,
        Anshuman Khandual <khandual@linux.vnet.ibm.com>,
        virtualization@lists.linux-foundation.org,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org,
        aik@ozlabs.ru, robh@kernel.org, joe@perches.com,
        elfring@users.sourceforge.net, david@gibson.dropbear.id.au,
        jasowang@redhat.com, mpe@ellerman.id.au, linuxram@us.ibm.com,
        haren@linux.vnet.ibm.com, paulus@samba.org,
        srikar@linux.vnet.ibm.com, robin.murphy@arm.com,
        jean-philippe.brucker@arm.com, marc.zyngier@arm.com
Subject: Re: [RFC 0/4] Virtio uses DMA API for all devices
Message-ID: <20180802200646-mutt-send-email-mst@kernel.org>
References: <20180730125100-mutt-send-email-mst@kernel.org>
 <20180730111802.GA9830@infradead.org>
 <20180730155633-mutt-send-email-mst@kernel.org>
 <20180731173052.GA17153@infradead.org>
 <3d6e81511571260de1c8047aaffa8ac4df093d2e.camel@kernel.crashing.org>
 <20180801081637.GA14438@arm.com>
 <20180801083639.GF26378@infradead.org>
 <26c1d3d50d8e081eed44fe9940fbefed34598cbd.camel@kernel.crashing.org>
 <20180802182959-mutt-send-email-mst@kernel.org>
 <82ccef6ec3d95ee43f3990a4a2d0aea87eb45e89.camel@kernel.crashing.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <82ccef6ec3d95ee43f3990a4a2d0aea87eb45e89.camel@kernel.crashing.org>
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

On Thu, Aug 02, 2018 at 11:01:26AM -0500, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote:
> On Thu, 2018-08-02 at 18:41 +0300, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> > 
> > > I don't completely agree:
> > > 
> > > 1 - VIRTIO_F_IOMMU_PLATFORM is a property of the "other side", ie qemu
> > > for example. It indicates that the peer bypasses the normal platform
> > > iommu. The platform code in the guest has no real way to know that this
> > > is the case, this is a specific "feature" of the qemu implementation.
> > > 
> > > 2 - VIRTIO_F_PLATFORM_DMA (or whatever you want to call it), is a
> > > property of the guest platform itself (not qemu), there's no way the
> > > "peer" can advertize it via the virtio negociated flags. At least for
> > > us. I don't know for sure whether that would be workable for the ARM
> > > case. In our case, qemu has no idea at VM creation time that the VM
> > > will turn itself into a secure VM and thus will require bounce
> > > buffering for IOs (including virtio).
> > > 
> > > So unless we have another hook for the arch code to set
> > > VIRTIO_F_PLATFORM_DMA on selected (or all) virtio devices from the
> > > guest itself, I don't see that as a way to deal with it.
> > > 
> > > >  The other issue is VIRTIO_F_IO_BARRIER
> > > > which is very vaguely defined, and which needs a better definition.
> > > > And last but not least we'll need some text explaining the challenges
> > > > of hardware devices - I think VIRTIO_F_PLATFORM_DMA + VIRTIO_F_IO_BARRIER
> > > > is what would basically cover them, but a good description including
> > > > an explanation of why these matter.
> > > 
> > > Ben.
> > > 
> > 
> > So is it true that from qemu point of view there is nothing special
> > going on?  You pass in a PA, host writes there.
> 
> Yes, qemu doesn't see a different. It's the guest that will bounce the
> pages via a pool of "insecure" pages that qemu can access. Normal pages
> in a secure VM come from PAs that qemu cannot physically access.
> 
> Cheers,
> Ben.
> 

I see. So yes, given that device does not know or care, using
virtio features is an awkward fit.

So let's say as a quick fix for you maybe we could generalize the
xen_domain hack, instead of just checking xen_domain check some static
branch.  Then teach xen and others to enable that.
OK but problem then becomes this: if you do this and virtio device appears
behind a vIOMMU and it does not advertize the IOMMU flag, the
code will try to use the vIOMMU mappings and fail.

It does look like even with trick above, you need a special version of
DMA ops that does just swiotlb but not any of the other things DMA API
might do.

Thoughts?

-- 
MST