Michael S. Tsirkin
2021-Oct-14 06:26 UTC
[PATCH V2 07/12] virtio-pci: harden INTX interrupts
On Thu, Oct 14, 2021 at 02:20:17PM +0800, Jason Wang wrote:> On Thu, Oct 14, 2021 at 1:50 PM Michael S. Tsirkin <mst at redhat.com> wrote: > > > > On Thu, Oct 14, 2021 at 10:35:48AM +0800, Jason Wang wrote: > > > On Wed, Oct 13, 2021 at 5:42 PM Michael S. Tsirkin <mst at redhat.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > On Tue, Oct 12, 2021 at 02:52:22PM +0800, Jason Wang wrote: > > > > > This patch tries to make sure the virtio interrupt handler for INTX > > > > > won't be called after a reset and before virtio_device_ready(). We > > > > > can't use IRQF_NO_AUTOEN since we're using shared interrupt > > > > > (IRQF_SHARED). So this patch tracks the INTX enabling status in a new > > > > > intx_soft_enabled variable and toggle it during in > > > > > vp_disable/enable_vectors(). The INTX interrupt handler will check > > > > > intx_soft_enabled before processing the actual interrupt. > > > > > > > > > > Cc: Boqun Feng <boqun.feng at gmail.com> > > > > > Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx at linutronix.de> > > > > > Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz at infradead.org> > > > > > Cc: Paul E. McKenney <paulmck at kernel.org> > > > > > Signed-off-by: Jason Wang <jasowang at redhat.com> > > > > > --- > > > > > drivers/virtio/virtio_pci_common.c | 24 ++++++++++++++++++++++-- > > > > > drivers/virtio/virtio_pci_common.h | 1 + > > > > > 2 files changed, 23 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) > > > > > > > > > > diff --git a/drivers/virtio/virtio_pci_common.c b/drivers/virtio/virtio_pci_common.c > > > > > index 0b9523e6dd39..5ae6a2a4eb77 100644 > > > > > --- a/drivers/virtio/virtio_pci_common.c > > > > > +++ b/drivers/virtio/virtio_pci_common.c > > > > > @@ -30,8 +30,16 @@ void vp_disable_vectors(struct virtio_device *vdev) > > > > > struct virtio_pci_device *vp_dev = to_vp_device(vdev); > > > > > int i; > > > > > > > > > > - if (vp_dev->intx_enabled) > > > > > + if (vp_dev->intx_enabled) { > > > > > + /* > > > > > + * The below synchronize() guarantees that any > > > > > + * interrupt for this line arriving after > > > > > + * synchronize_irq() has completed is guaranteed to see > > > > > + * intx_soft_enabled == false. > > > > > + */ > > > > > + WRITE_ONCE(vp_dev->intx_soft_enabled, false); > > > > > synchronize_irq(vp_dev->pci_dev->irq); > > > > > + } > > > > > > > > > > for (i = 0; i < vp_dev->msix_vectors; ++i) > > > > > disable_irq(pci_irq_vector(vp_dev->pci_dev, i)); > > > > > @@ -43,8 +51,16 @@ void vp_enable_vectors(struct virtio_device *vdev) > > > > > struct virtio_pci_device *vp_dev = to_vp_device(vdev); > > > > > int i; > > > > > > > > > > - if (vp_dev->intx_enabled) > > > > > + if (vp_dev->intx_enabled) { > > > > > + disable_irq(vp_dev->pci_dev->irq); > > > > > + /* > > > > > + * The above disable_irq() provides TSO ordering and > > > > > + * as such promotes the below store to store-release. > > > > > + */ > > > > > + WRITE_ONCE(vp_dev->intx_soft_enabled, true); > > > > > + enable_irq(vp_dev->pci_dev->irq); > > > > > return; > > > > > + } > > > > > > > > > > for (i = 0; i < vp_dev->msix_vectors; ++i) > > > > > enable_irq(pci_irq_vector(vp_dev->pci_dev, i)); > > > > > @@ -97,6 +113,10 @@ static irqreturn_t vp_interrupt(int irq, void *opaque) > > > > > struct virtio_pci_device *vp_dev = opaque; > > > > > u8 isr; > > > > > > > > > > + /* read intx_soft_enabled before read others */ > > > > > + if (!smp_load_acquire(&vp_dev->intx_soft_enabled)) > > > > > + return IRQ_NONE; > > > > > + > > > > > /* reading the ISR has the effect of also clearing it so it's very > > > > > * important to save off the value. */ > > > > > isr = ioread8(vp_dev->isr); > > > > > > > > I don't see why we need this ordering guarantee here. > > > > > > > > synchronize_irq above makes sure no interrupt handler > > > > is in progress. > > > > > > Yes. > > > > > > > the handler itself thus does not need > > > > any specific order, it is ok if intx_soft_enabled is read > > > > after, not before the rest of it. > > > > > > But the interrupt could be raised after synchronize_irq() which may > > > see a false of the intx_soft_enabled. > > > > You mean a "true" value right? false is what we are writing there. > > I meant that we want to not go for stuff like vq->callback after the > synchronize_irq() after setting intx_soft_enabled to false. Otherwise > we may get unexpected results like use after free. Host can craft ISR > in this case. > > > > Are you sure it can happen? I think that synchronize_irq makes the value > > visible on all CPUs running the irq. > > Yes, so the false is visible by vp_interrupt(), we can't do the other > task before we check intx_soft_enabled.But the order does not matter. synchronize_irq will make sure everything is visible.> > > > > In this case we still need the > > > make sure intx_soft_enbled to be read first instead of allowing other > > > operations to be done first, otherwise the intx_soft_enabled is > > > meaningless. > > > > > > Thanks > > > > If intx_soft_enbled were not visible after synchronize_irq then > > it does not matter in which order we read it wrt other values, > > it still wouldn't work right. > > Yes. > > ThanksWe are agreed then? No need for a barrier here, READ_ONCE is enough?> > > > > > > > > > Just READ_ONCE should be enough, and we can drop the comment. > > > > > > > > > > > > > diff --git a/drivers/virtio/virtio_pci_common.h b/drivers/virtio/virtio_pci_common.h > > > > > index a235ce9ff6a5..3c06e0f92ee4 100644 > > > > > --- a/drivers/virtio/virtio_pci_common.h > > > > > +++ b/drivers/virtio/virtio_pci_common.h > > > > > @@ -64,6 +64,7 @@ struct virtio_pci_device { > > > > > /* MSI-X support */ > > > > > int msix_enabled; > > > > > int intx_enabled; > > > > > + bool intx_soft_enabled; > > > > > cpumask_var_t *msix_affinity_masks; > > > > > /* Name strings for interrupts. This size should be enough, > > > > > * and I'm too lazy to allocate each name separately. */ > > > > > -- > > > > > 2.25.1 > > > > > >
On Thu, Oct 14, 2021 at 2:26 PM Michael S. Tsirkin <mst at redhat.com> wrote:> > On Thu, Oct 14, 2021 at 02:20:17PM +0800, Jason Wang wrote: > > On Thu, Oct 14, 2021 at 1:50 PM Michael S. Tsirkin <mst at redhat.com> wrote: > > > > > > On Thu, Oct 14, 2021 at 10:35:48AM +0800, Jason Wang wrote: > > > > On Wed, Oct 13, 2021 at 5:42 PM Michael S. Tsirkin <mst at redhat.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > On Tue, Oct 12, 2021 at 02:52:22PM +0800, Jason Wang wrote: > > > > > > This patch tries to make sure the virtio interrupt handler for INTX > > > > > > won't be called after a reset and before virtio_device_ready(). We > > > > > > can't use IRQF_NO_AUTOEN since we're using shared interrupt > > > > > > (IRQF_SHARED). So this patch tracks the INTX enabling status in a new > > > > > > intx_soft_enabled variable and toggle it during in > > > > > > vp_disable/enable_vectors(). The INTX interrupt handler will check > > > > > > intx_soft_enabled before processing the actual interrupt. > > > > > > > > > > > > Cc: Boqun Feng <boqun.feng at gmail.com> > > > > > > Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx at linutronix.de> > > > > > > Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz at infradead.org> > > > > > > Cc: Paul E. McKenney <paulmck at kernel.org> > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Jason Wang <jasowang at redhat.com> > > > > > > --- > > > > > > drivers/virtio/virtio_pci_common.c | 24 ++++++++++++++++++++++-- > > > > > > drivers/virtio/virtio_pci_common.h | 1 + > > > > > > 2 files changed, 23 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) > > > > > > > > > > > > diff --git a/drivers/virtio/virtio_pci_common.c b/drivers/virtio/virtio_pci_common.c > > > > > > index 0b9523e6dd39..5ae6a2a4eb77 100644 > > > > > > --- a/drivers/virtio/virtio_pci_common.c > > > > > > +++ b/drivers/virtio/virtio_pci_common.c > > > > > > @@ -30,8 +30,16 @@ void vp_disable_vectors(struct virtio_device *vdev) > > > > > > struct virtio_pci_device *vp_dev = to_vp_device(vdev); > > > > > > int i; > > > > > > > > > > > > - if (vp_dev->intx_enabled) > > > > > > + if (vp_dev->intx_enabled) { > > > > > > + /* > > > > > > + * The below synchronize() guarantees that any > > > > > > + * interrupt for this line arriving after > > > > > > + * synchronize_irq() has completed is guaranteed to see > > > > > > + * intx_soft_enabled == false. > > > > > > + */ > > > > > > + WRITE_ONCE(vp_dev->intx_soft_enabled, false); > > > > > > synchronize_irq(vp_dev->pci_dev->irq); > > > > > > + } > > > > > > > > > > > > for (i = 0; i < vp_dev->msix_vectors; ++i) > > > > > > disable_irq(pci_irq_vector(vp_dev->pci_dev, i)); > > > > > > @@ -43,8 +51,16 @@ void vp_enable_vectors(struct virtio_device *vdev) > > > > > > struct virtio_pci_device *vp_dev = to_vp_device(vdev); > > > > > > int i; > > > > > > > > > > > > - if (vp_dev->intx_enabled) > > > > > > + if (vp_dev->intx_enabled) { > > > > > > + disable_irq(vp_dev->pci_dev->irq); > > > > > > + /* > > > > > > + * The above disable_irq() provides TSO ordering and > > > > > > + * as such promotes the below store to store-release. > > > > > > + */ > > > > > > + WRITE_ONCE(vp_dev->intx_soft_enabled, true); > > > > > > + enable_irq(vp_dev->pci_dev->irq); > > > > > > return; > > > > > > + } > > > > > > > > > > > > for (i = 0; i < vp_dev->msix_vectors; ++i) > > > > > > enable_irq(pci_irq_vector(vp_dev->pci_dev, i)); > > > > > > @@ -97,6 +113,10 @@ static irqreturn_t vp_interrupt(int irq, void *opaque) > > > > > > struct virtio_pci_device *vp_dev = opaque; > > > > > > u8 isr; > > > > > > > > > > > > + /* read intx_soft_enabled before read others */ > > > > > > + if (!smp_load_acquire(&vp_dev->intx_soft_enabled)) > > > > > > + return IRQ_NONE; > > > > > > + > > > > > > /* reading the ISR has the effect of also clearing it so it's very > > > > > > * important to save off the value. */ > > > > > > isr = ioread8(vp_dev->isr); > > > > > > > > > > I don't see why we need this ordering guarantee here. > > > > > > > > > > synchronize_irq above makes sure no interrupt handler > > > > > is in progress. > > > > > > > > Yes. > > > > > > > > > the handler itself thus does not need > > > > > any specific order, it is ok if intx_soft_enabled is read > > > > > after, not before the rest of it. > > > > > > > > But the interrupt could be raised after synchronize_irq() which may > > > > see a false of the intx_soft_enabled. > > > > > > You mean a "true" value right? false is what we are writing there. > > > > I meant that we want to not go for stuff like vq->callback after the > > synchronize_irq() after setting intx_soft_enabled to false. Otherwise > > we may get unexpected results like use after free. Host can craft ISR > > in this case. > > > > > > Are you sure it can happen? I think that synchronize_irq makes the value > > > visible on all CPUs running the irq. > > > > Yes, so the false is visible by vp_interrupt(), we can't do the other > > task before we check intx_soft_enabled. > > But the order does not matter. synchronize_irq will make sure > everything is visible.Not the thing that happens after synchronize_irq(). E.g for remove_vq_common(): static void remove_vq_common(struct virtnet_info *vi) { vi->vdev->config->reset(vi->vdev); /* Free unused buffers in both send and recv, if any. */ free_unused_bufs(vi); free_receive_bufs(vi); free_receive_page_frags(vi); virtnet_del_vqs(vi); } The interrupt could be raised by the device after .reset(). Thanks> > > > > > > > In this case we still need the > > > > make sure intx_soft_enbled to be read first instead of allowing other > > > > operations to be done first, otherwise the intx_soft_enabled is > > > > meaningless. > > > > > > > > Thanks > > > > > > If intx_soft_enbled were not visible after synchronize_irq then > > > it does not matter in which order we read it wrt other values, > > > it still wouldn't work right. > > > > Yes. > > > > Thanks > > > We are agreed then? No need for a barrier here, READ_ONCE is enough? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Just READ_ONCE should be enough, and we can drop the comment. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > diff --git a/drivers/virtio/virtio_pci_common.h b/drivers/virtio/virtio_pci_common.h > > > > > > index a235ce9ff6a5..3c06e0f92ee4 100644 > > > > > > --- a/drivers/virtio/virtio_pci_common.h > > > > > > +++ b/drivers/virtio/virtio_pci_common.h > > > > > > @@ -64,6 +64,7 @@ struct virtio_pci_device { > > > > > > /* MSI-X support */ > > > > > > int msix_enabled; > > > > > > int intx_enabled; > > > > > > + bool intx_soft_enabled; > > > > > > cpumask_var_t *msix_affinity_masks; > > > > > > /* Name strings for interrupts. This size should be enough, > > > > > > * and I'm too lazy to allocate each name separately. */ > > > > > > -- > > > > > > 2.25.1 > > > > > > > > >