Christian Borntraeger
2020-Jun-16 06:55 UTC
[PATCH v2 1/1] s390: virtio: let arch accept devices without IOMMU feature
On 15.06.20 14:39, Pierre Morel wrote:> An architecture protecting the guest memory against unauthorized host > access may want to enforce VIRTIO I/O device protection through the > use of VIRTIO_F_IOMMU_PLATFORM. > > Let's give a chance to the architecture to accept or not devices > without VIRTIO_F_IOMMU_PLATFORM. > > Signed-off-by: Pierre Morel <pmorel at linux.ibm.com>Acked-by: Christian Borntraeger <borntraeger at de.ibm.com> Shouldnt we maybe add a pr_warn if that happens to help the admins to understand what is going on?> --- > arch/s390/mm/init.c | 6 ++++++ > drivers/virtio/virtio.c | 9 +++++++++ > include/linux/virtio.h | 2 ++ > 3 files changed, 17 insertions(+) > > diff --git a/arch/s390/mm/init.c b/arch/s390/mm/init.c > index 87b2d024e75a..3f04ad09650f 100644 > --- a/arch/s390/mm/init.c > +++ b/arch/s390/mm/init.c > @@ -46,6 +46,7 @@ > #include <asm/kasan.h> > #include <asm/dma-mapping.h> > #include <asm/uv.h> > +#include <linux/virtio.h> > > pgd_t swapper_pg_dir[PTRS_PER_PGD] __section(.bss..swapper_pg_dir); > > @@ -162,6 +163,11 @@ bool force_dma_unencrypted(struct device *dev) > return is_prot_virt_guest(); > } > > +int arch_needs_iommu_platform(struct virtio_device *dev) > +{ > + return is_prot_virt_guest(); > +} > + > /* protected virtualization */ > static void pv_init(void) > { > diff --git a/drivers/virtio/virtio.c b/drivers/virtio/virtio.c > index a977e32a88f2..30091089bee8 100644 > --- a/drivers/virtio/virtio.c > +++ b/drivers/virtio/virtio.c > @@ -167,6 +167,11 @@ void virtio_add_status(struct virtio_device *dev, unsigned int status) > } > EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(virtio_add_status); > > +int __weak arch_needs_iommu_platform(struct virtio_device *dev) > +{ > + return 0; > +} > + > int virtio_finalize_features(struct virtio_device *dev) > { > int ret = dev->config->finalize_features(dev); > @@ -179,6 +184,10 @@ int virtio_finalize_features(struct virtio_device *dev) > if (!virtio_has_feature(dev, VIRTIO_F_VERSION_1)) > return 0; > > + if (arch_needs_iommu_platform(dev) && > + !virtio_has_feature(dev, VIRTIO_F_IOMMU_PLATFORM)) > + return -EIO; > + > virtio_add_status(dev, VIRTIO_CONFIG_S_FEATURES_OK); > status = dev->config->get_status(dev); > if (!(status & VIRTIO_CONFIG_S_FEATURES_OK)) { > diff --git a/include/linux/virtio.h b/include/linux/virtio.h > index a493eac08393..2c46b310c38c 100644 > --- a/include/linux/virtio.h > +++ b/include/linux/virtio.h > @@ -195,4 +195,6 @@ void unregister_virtio_driver(struct virtio_driver *drv); > #define module_virtio_driver(__virtio_driver) \ > module_driver(__virtio_driver, register_virtio_driver, \ > unregister_virtio_driver) > + > +int arch_needs_iommu_platform(struct virtio_device *dev); > #endif /* _LINUX_VIRTIO_H */ >
Pierre Morel
2020-Jun-16 07:35 UTC
[PATCH v2 1/1] s390: virtio: let arch accept devices without IOMMU feature
On 2020-06-16 08:55, Christian Borntraeger wrote:> > > On 15.06.20 14:39, Pierre Morel wrote: >> An architecture protecting the guest memory against unauthorized host >> access may want to enforce VIRTIO I/O device protection through the >> use of VIRTIO_F_IOMMU_PLATFORM. >> >> Let's give a chance to the architecture to accept or not devices >> without VIRTIO_F_IOMMU_PLATFORM. >> >> Signed-off-by: Pierre Morel <pmorel at linux.ibm.com> > > > Acked-by: Christian Borntraeger <borntraeger at de.ibm.com>Thanks,> > Shouldnt we maybe add a pr_warn if that happens to help the admins to understand what is going on? > >Yes, Connie asked for it too, good that you remind it to me, I add it. Thanks, Pierre>> --- >> arch/s390/mm/init.c | 6 ++++++ >> drivers/virtio/virtio.c | 9 +++++++++ >> include/linux/virtio.h | 2 ++ >> 3 files changed, 17 insertions(+) >> >> diff --git a/arch/s390/mm/init.c b/arch/s390/mm/init.c >> index 87b2d024e75a..3f04ad09650f 100644 >> --- a/arch/s390/mm/init.c >> +++ b/arch/s390/mm/init.c >> @@ -46,6 +46,7 @@ >> #include <asm/kasan.h> >> #include <asm/dma-mapping.h> >> #include <asm/uv.h> >> +#include <linux/virtio.h> >> >> pgd_t swapper_pg_dir[PTRS_PER_PGD] __section(.bss..swapper_pg_dir); >> >> @@ -162,6 +163,11 @@ bool force_dma_unencrypted(struct device *dev) >> return is_prot_virt_guest(); >> } >> >> +int arch_needs_iommu_platform(struct virtio_device *dev) >> +{ >> + return is_prot_virt_guest(); >> +} >> + >> /* protected virtualization */ >> static void pv_init(void) >> { >> diff --git a/drivers/virtio/virtio.c b/drivers/virtio/virtio.c >> index a977e32a88f2..30091089bee8 100644 >> --- a/drivers/virtio/virtio.c >> +++ b/drivers/virtio/virtio.c >> @@ -167,6 +167,11 @@ void virtio_add_status(struct virtio_device *dev, unsigned int status) >> } >> EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(virtio_add_status); >> >> +int __weak arch_needs_iommu_platform(struct virtio_device *dev) >> +{ >> + return 0; >> +} >> + >> int virtio_finalize_features(struct virtio_device *dev) >> { >> int ret = dev->config->finalize_features(dev); >> @@ -179,6 +184,10 @@ int virtio_finalize_features(struct virtio_device *dev) >> if (!virtio_has_feature(dev, VIRTIO_F_VERSION_1)) >> return 0; >> >> + if (arch_needs_iommu_platform(dev) && >> + !virtio_has_feature(dev, VIRTIO_F_IOMMU_PLATFORM)) >> + return -EIO; >> + >> virtio_add_status(dev, VIRTIO_CONFIG_S_FEATURES_OK); >> status = dev->config->get_status(dev); >> if (!(status & VIRTIO_CONFIG_S_FEATURES_OK)) { >> diff --git a/include/linux/virtio.h b/include/linux/virtio.h >> index a493eac08393..2c46b310c38c 100644 >> --- a/include/linux/virtio.h >> +++ b/include/linux/virtio.h >> @@ -195,4 +195,6 @@ void unregister_virtio_driver(struct virtio_driver *drv); >> #define module_virtio_driver(__virtio_driver) \ >> module_driver(__virtio_driver, register_virtio_driver, \ >> unregister_virtio_driver) >> + >> +int arch_needs_iommu_platform(struct virtio_device *dev); >> #endif /* _LINUX_VIRTIO_H */ >>-- Pierre Morel IBM Lab Boeblingen
Cornelia Huck
2020-Jun-16 12:21 UTC
[PATCH v2 1/1] s390: virtio: let arch accept devices without IOMMU feature
On Tue, 16 Jun 2020 09:35:19 +0200 Pierre Morel <pmorel at linux.ibm.com> wrote:> On 2020-06-16 08:55, Christian Borntraeger wrote: > > > > > > On 15.06.20 14:39, Pierre Morel wrote: > >> An architecture protecting the guest memory against unauthorized host > >> access may want to enforce VIRTIO I/O device protection through the > >> use of VIRTIO_F_IOMMU_PLATFORM. > >> > >> Let's give a chance to the architecture to accept or not devices > >> without VIRTIO_F_IOMMU_PLATFORM. > >> > >> Signed-off-by: Pierre Morel <pmorel at linux.ibm.com> > > > > > > Acked-by: Christian Borntraeger <borntraeger at de.ibm.com> > > Thanks, > > > > > Shouldnt we maybe add a pr_warn if that happens to help the admins to understand what is going on? > > > > > > Yes, Connie asked for it too, good that you remind it to me, I add it.Yes, please :)
Possibly Parallel Threads
- [PATCH v2 1/1] s390: virtio: let arch accept devices without IOMMU feature
- [PATCH v2 1/1] s390: virtio: let arch accept devices without IOMMU feature
- [PATCH v2 1/1] s390: virtio: let arch accept devices without IOMMU feature
- [PATCH v2 1/1] s390: virtio: let arch accept devices without IOMMU feature
- [PATCH v2 1/1] s390: virtio: let arch accept devices without IOMMU feature