Received: by 2002:ac0:aed5:0:0:0:0:0 with SMTP id t21csp198689imb; Thu, 28 Feb 2019 21:04:25 -0800 (PST) X-Google-Smtp-Source: AHgI3Ibo44IOR2nOCif4NvdPjUtJgAjFk8JS+J2msG5q/EDmRT+eQxCX/xzo64QeZj4WgOf3tQVw X-Received: by 2002:aa7:8c8c:: with SMTP id p12mr3794098pfd.0.1551416665501; Thu, 28 Feb 2019 21:04:25 -0800 (PST) ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; t=1551416665; cv=none; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; b=hjFHCa6ya/qGIDqmaMb0M13A8BfALGxPyrpGgIHVA/J9j+595efy8I0McsjuYB9Eol GCw+eLNS2I6o7XmmRv48p8Xbbje80Xz1BcVQ0QuNP03d5YEyS/e7ioAeaNR7Wks3rAp2 ul7yfE7a94vYvGs6ynoHZEKFy+WlQUdBf2cpCYYYQNTJHMg0Ufv2UjWaQs84ixCdfuBE v+dqWy/pvXvS/tAWX2T+1h7a5rft2t/qV1/wjkobnUU28+1i5TwPsv82PeKUo5h/x6eM yPPRwZbKR+4o0CJwFwOv7rQG9tBZ9rZOInmhuJTMmVeDrZ60w/xjH32K0zE4hfSomxP5 LEEw== ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; h=list-id:precedence:sender:content-transfer-encoding:in-reply-to :mime-version:user-agent:date:message-id:from:cc:references:to :subject; bh=TE3dHjQToenKYtbwd7dBZ80D30PFLkfpbA7LmskLHHE=; b=YfGclzOxf1IborPm8x5OeQ+aRUNCtyP2qNOosprNgH5j811S9B4jBVGXWAYInRTpOl wr0HmACDXkLpjjD/blo8E/gyiAZnqoxdl437cgvA/jI9wgJVxGqpUb121OT9tkD9lql1 wLpeTXAf5wMtaGcHZ6lVqpo6eO1b11qa9nnXE1f9MYXikF1Y0GANKvUG0H8zqKRTKpV8 OYlLUfRZn2ywLaIEDTQKf1CoAs270HR7lO7Mv37BDfkqGal1rgOsuonH9MoJQPEBCnG9 apl2rmimYqzGEtfOSaoQyVZSd9DMY9GN9r8nVJ+w0FW6XIKQCAL0pqhvUUx//j8yQTmJ wUjQ== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Return-Path: Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org. [209.132.180.67]) by mx.google.com with ESMTP id r16si19421043pgm.483.2019.02.28.21.04.06; Thu, 28 Feb 2019 21:04:25 -0800 (PST) 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; Authentication-Results: mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1727986AbfCAEo2 (ORCPT + 99 others); Thu, 28 Feb 2019 23:44:28 -0500 Received: from szxga05-in.huawei.com ([45.249.212.191]:4751 "EHLO huawei.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1726189AbfCAEo1 (ORCPT ); Thu, 28 Feb 2019 23:44:27 -0500 Received: from DGGEMS407-HUB.china.huawei.com (unknown [172.30.72.58]) by Forcepoint Email with ESMTP id 327C565CE8DC18230449; Fri, 1 Mar 2019 12:44:22 +0800 (CST) Received: from [127.0.0.1] (10.177.23.164) by DGGEMS407-HUB.china.huawei.com (10.3.19.207) with Microsoft SMTP Server id 14.3.408.0; Fri, 1 Mar 2019 12:44:13 +0800 Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC 1/1] iommu: set the default iommu-dma mode as non-strict To: Hanjun Guo , Jean-Philippe Brucker , John Garry , "Robin Murphy" , Will Deacon , "Joerg Roedel" , linux-arm-kernel , iommu , linux-kernel References: <20190131135211.6732-1-thunder.leizhen@huawei.com> <94b9b0c9-1a24-63ba-5abe-5f6d79fed415@arm.com> CC: Yunsheng Lin , Linuxarm , "Chengchuanning (Hisi-Turing)" From: "Leizhen (ThunderTown)" Message-ID: <5C78B89C.7040100@huawei.com> Date: Fri, 1 Mar 2019 12:44:12 +0800 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/38.5.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Originating-IP: [10.177.23.164] X-CFilter-Loop: Reflected Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 2019/2/26 20:36, Hanjun Guo wrote: > Hi Jean, > > On 2019/1/31 22:55, Jean-Philippe Brucker wrote: >> Hi, >> >> On 31/01/2019 13:52, Zhen Lei wrote: >>> Currently, many peripherals are faster than before. For example, the top >>> speed of the older netcard is 10Gb/s, and now it's more than 25Gb/s. But >>> when iommu page-table mapping enabled, it's hard to reach the top speed >>> in strict mode, because of frequently map and unmap operations. In order >>> to keep abreast of the times, I think it's better to set non-strict as >>> default. >> >> Most users won't be aware of this relaxation and will have their system >> vulnerable to e.g. thunderbolt hotplug. See for example 4.3 Deferred >> Invalidation in >> http://www.cs.technion.ac.il/users/wwwb/cgi-bin/tr-get.cgi/2018/MSC/MSC-2018-21.pdf Hi Jean, In fact, we have discussed the vulnerable of deferred invalidation before upstream the non-strict patches. The attacks maybe possible because of an untrusted device or the mistake of the device driver. And we limited the VFIO to still use strict mode. As mentioned in the pdf, limit the freed memory with deferred invalidation only to be reused by the device, can mitigate the vulnerability. But it's too hard to implement it now. A compromise maybe we only apply non-strict to (1) dma_free_coherent, because the memory is controlled by DMA common module, so we can make the memory to be freed after the global invalidation in the timer handler. (2) And provide some new APIs related to iommu_unmap_page/sg, these new APIs deferred invalidation. And the candiate device drivers update the APIs if they want to improve performance. (3) Make sure that only the trusted devices and trusted drivers can apply (1) and (2). For example, the driver must be built into kernel Image. So that some high-end trusted devices use non-strict mode, and keep others still using strict mode. The drivers who want to use non-strict mode, should change to use new APIs by themselves. >> >> Why not keep the policy to secure by default, as we do for >> iommu.passthrough? And maybe add something similar to >> CONFIG_IOMMU_DEFAULT_PASSTRHOUGH? It's easy enough for experts to pass a >> command-line argument or change the default config. > > Sorry for the late reply, it was Chinese new year, and we had a long discussion > internally, we are fine to add a Kconfig but not sure OS vendors will set it > to default y. > > OS vendors seems not happy to pass a command-line argument, to be honest, > this is our motivation to enable non-strict as default. Hope OS vendors > can see this email thread, and give some input here. > > Thanks > Hanjun > > > . > -- Thanks! BestRegards