Displaying 20 results from an estimated 56 matches for "a977e32a88f2".
2020 Jul 07
3
[PATCH v4 1/2] virtio: let arch validate VIRTIO features
...; Signed-off-by: Pierre Morel <pmorel at linux.ibm.com>
> ---
> drivers/virtio/virtio.c | 19 +++++++++++++++++++
> include/linux/virtio_config.h | 1 +
> 2 files changed, 20 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/virtio/virtio.c b/drivers/virtio/virtio.c
> index a977e32a88f2..3179a8aa76f5 100644
> --- a/drivers/virtio/virtio.c
> +++ b/drivers/virtio/virtio.c
> @@ -167,6 +167,21 @@ void virtio_add_status(struct virtio_device *dev, unsigned int status)
> }
> EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(virtio_add_status);
>
> +/*
> + * arch_needs_virtio_iommu_platform -...
2020 Jul 07
3
[PATCH v4 1/2] virtio: let arch validate VIRTIO features
...; Signed-off-by: Pierre Morel <pmorel at linux.ibm.com>
> ---
> drivers/virtio/virtio.c | 19 +++++++++++++++++++
> include/linux/virtio_config.h | 1 +
> 2 files changed, 20 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/virtio/virtio.c b/drivers/virtio/virtio.c
> index a977e32a88f2..3179a8aa76f5 100644
> --- a/drivers/virtio/virtio.c
> +++ b/drivers/virtio/virtio.c
> @@ -167,6 +167,21 @@ void virtio_add_status(struct virtio_device *dev, unsigned int status)
> }
> EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(virtio_add_status);
>
> +/*
> + * arch_needs_virtio_iommu_platform -...
2020 Aug 18
2
[PATCH v8 1/2] virtio: let arch validate VIRTIO features
...ORM for virtio
devices. ARCH_HAS_RESTRICTED_VIRTIO_MEMORY_ACCESS? Or is this intended
to cover cases outside of virtio as well?
> +
> menuconfig VIRTIO_MENU
> bool "Virtio drivers"
> default y
> diff --git a/drivers/virtio/virtio.c b/drivers/virtio/virtio.c
> index a977e32a88f2..1471db7d6510 100644
> --- a/drivers/virtio/virtio.c
> +++ b/drivers/virtio/virtio.c
> @@ -176,6 +176,10 @@ int virtio_finalize_features(struct virtio_device *dev)
> if (ret)
> return ret;
>
> + ret = arch_has_restricted_memory_access(dev);
> + if (ret)
> + return...
2020 Aug 18
2
[PATCH v8 1/2] virtio: let arch validate VIRTIO features
...ORM for virtio
devices. ARCH_HAS_RESTRICTED_VIRTIO_MEMORY_ACCESS? Or is this intended
to cover cases outside of virtio as well?
> +
> menuconfig VIRTIO_MENU
> bool "Virtio drivers"
> default y
> diff --git a/drivers/virtio/virtio.c b/drivers/virtio/virtio.c
> index a977e32a88f2..1471db7d6510 100644
> --- a/drivers/virtio/virtio.c
> +++ b/drivers/virtio/virtio.c
> @@ -176,6 +176,10 @@ int virtio_finalize_features(struct virtio_device *dev)
> if (ret)
> return ret;
>
> + ret = arch_has_restricted_memory_access(dev);
> + if (ret)
> + return...
2020 Jun 15
4
[PATCH v2 0/1] s390: virtio: let's arch choose to accept devices without IOMMU feature
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.
Pierre Morel (1):
s390: virtio: let arch accept devices without IOMMU feature
arch/s390/mm/init.c | 6 ++++++
2020 Jun 15
3
[PATCH] s390: protvirt: virtio: Refuse device without IOMMU
...tible
> with our problem.
>
> Even DMA and IOMMU are different things, I think they should be used
> together in our case.
>
> What do you think?
>
> The patch would then be something like:
>
> diff --git a/drivers/virtio/virtio.c b/drivers/virtio/virtio.c
> index a977e32a88f2..53476d5bbe35 100644
> --- a/drivers/virtio/virtio.c
> +++ b/drivers/virtio/virtio.c
> @@ -4,6 +4,7 @@
> ?#include <linux/virtio_config.h>
> ?#include <linux/module.h>
> ?#include <linux/idr.h>
> +#include <linux/dma-direct.h>
> ?#include <uapi/lin...
2020 Jun 15
3
[PATCH] s390: protvirt: virtio: Refuse device without IOMMU
...tible
> with our problem.
>
> Even DMA and IOMMU are different things, I think they should be used
> together in our case.
>
> What do you think?
>
> The patch would then be something like:
>
> diff --git a/drivers/virtio/virtio.c b/drivers/virtio/virtio.c
> index a977e32a88f2..53476d5bbe35 100644
> --- a/drivers/virtio/virtio.c
> +++ b/drivers/virtio/virtio.c
> @@ -4,6 +4,7 @@
> ?#include <linux/virtio_config.h>
> ?#include <linux/module.h>
> ?#include <linux/idr.h>
> +#include <linux/dma-direct.h>
> ?#include <uapi/lin...
2020 Jun 17
1
[PATCH v3 1/1] s390: virtio: let arch accept devices without IOMMU feature
...> }
>
> +int arch_needs_virtio_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..aa8e01104f86 100644
> --- a/drivers/virtio/virtio.c
> +++ b/drivers/virtio/virtio.c
> @@ -167,6 +167,21 @@ void virtio_add_status(struct virtio_device *dev, unsigned int status)
> }
> EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(virtio_add_status);
>
> +/*
> + * arch_needs_virtio_iommu_platform -...
2020 Jun 17
1
[PATCH v3 1/1] s390: virtio: let arch accept devices without IOMMU feature
...> }
>
> +int arch_needs_virtio_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..aa8e01104f86 100644
> --- a/drivers/virtio/virtio.c
> +++ b/drivers/virtio/virtio.c
> @@ -167,6 +167,21 @@ void virtio_add_status(struct virtio_device *dev, unsigned int status)
> }
> EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(virtio_add_status);
>
> +/*
> + * arch_needs_virtio_iommu_platform -...
2020 Jun 17
6
[PATCH v3 0/1] s390: virtio: let arch choose to accept devices without IOMMU feature
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.
Pierre Morel (1):
s390: virtio: let arch accept devices without IOMMU feature
arch/s390/mm/init.c | 6 ++++++
2020 Jun 16
2
[PATCH v2 1/1] s390: virtio: let arch accept devices without IOMMU feature
...st();
> }
>
> +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 vi...
2020 Jun 16
2
[PATCH v2 1/1] s390: virtio: let arch accept devices without IOMMU feature
...st();
> }
>
> +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 vi...
2020 Jun 16
3
[PATCH v2 1/1] s390: virtio: let arch accept devices without IOMMU feature
...dev)
Maybe prefixing the name with virtio_ would help provide the
proper context.
> +{
> + 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 vi...
2020 Jun 16
3
[PATCH v2 1/1] s390: virtio: let arch accept devices without IOMMU feature
...dev)
Maybe prefixing the name with virtio_ would help provide the
proper context.
> +{
> + 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 vi...
2020 Jun 12
2
[PATCH] s390: protvirt: virtio: Refuse device without IOMMU
On 2020-06-11 05:10, Jason Wang wrote:
>
> On 2020/6/10 ??9:11, Pierre Morel wrote:
>> Protected Virtualisation protects the memory of the guest and
>> do not allow a the host to access all of its memory.
>>
>> Let's refuse a VIRTIO device which does not use IOMMU
>> protected access.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Pierre Morel <pmorel at
2020 Jun 12
2
[PATCH] s390: protvirt: virtio: Refuse device without IOMMU
On 2020-06-11 05:10, Jason Wang wrote:
>
> On 2020/6/10 ??9:11, Pierre Morel wrote:
>> Protected Virtualisation protects the memory of the guest and
>> do not allow a the host to access all of its memory.
>>
>> Let's refuse a VIRTIO device which does not use IOMMU
>> protected access.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Pierre Morel <pmorel at
2020 Jun 29
3
[PATCH v3 1/1] s390: virtio: let arch accept devices without IOMMU feature
...> }
>
> +int arch_needs_virtio_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..aa8e01104f86 100644
> --- a/drivers/virtio/virtio.c
> +++ b/drivers/virtio/virtio.c
> @@ -167,6 +167,21 @@ void virtio_add_status(struct virtio_device *dev, unsigned int status)
> }
> EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(virtio_add_status);
>
> +/*
> + * arch_needs_virtio_iommu_platform -...
2020 Jun 29
3
[PATCH v3 1/1] s390: virtio: let arch accept devices without IOMMU feature
...> }
>
> +int arch_needs_virtio_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..aa8e01104f86 100644
> --- a/drivers/virtio/virtio.c
> +++ b/drivers/virtio/virtio.c
> @@ -167,6 +167,21 @@ void virtio_add_status(struct virtio_device *dev, unsigned int status)
> }
> EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(virtio_add_status);
>
> +/*
> + * arch_needs_virtio_iommu_platform -...
2020 Jul 09
4
[PATCH v5 0/2] s390: virtio: let arch validate VIRTIO features
Hi all,
The goal of the series is to give a chance to the architecture
to validate VIRTIO device features.
in this respin:
1) I kept removed the ack from Jason as I reworked the patch
@Jason, the nature and goal of the patch did not really changed
please can I get back your acked-by with these changes?
2) I suppressed the unnecessary verbosity of the architecture
specific
2020 Aug 18
4
[PATCH v8 0/2] s390: virtio: let arch validate VIRTIO features
Hi all,
The goal of the series is to give a chance to the architecture
to validate VIRTIO device features.
in this respin:
I use the original idea from Connie for an optional
arch_has_restricted_memory_access.
I renamed the callback accordingly, added the definition of
ARCH_HAS_RESTRICTED_MEMORY_ACCESS inside the VIRTIO Kconfig
and the selection in the PROTECTED_VIRTUALIZATION_GUEST
config