|
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH 1/2] IOMMU/MMU: Adjust top level functions for VT-d Device-TLB flush error.
>>> On 17.03.16 at 07:54, <quan.xu@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> @@ -53,11 +55,21 @@ static int device_power_down(void)
>
> ioapic_suspend();
>
> - iommu_suspend();
> + err = iommu_suspend();
> + if ( err )
> + goto iommu_suspend_error;
>
> lapic_suspend();
>
> return 0;
> +
> +iommu_suspend_error:
Labels indented by at least one space please.
> --- a/xen/arch/x86/mm/p2m-ept.c
> +++ b/xen/arch/x86/mm/p2m-ept.c
> @@ -830,7 +830,15 @@ out:
> {
> if ( iommu_flags )
> for ( i = 0; i < (1 << order); i++ )
> - iommu_map_page(d, gfn + i, mfn_x(mfn) + i, iommu_flags);
> + {
> + rc = iommu_map_page(d, gfn + i, mfn_x(mfn) + i,
> iommu_flags);
> + if ( rc )
> + {
> + while ( i-- > 0 )
> + iommu_unmap_page(d, gfn + i);
> + break;
> + }
> + }
> else
> for ( i = 0; i < (1 << order); i++ )
> iommu_unmap_page(d, gfn + i);
Earlier on in the PV mm code you also checked iommu_unmap_page()'s
return code - why not here (and also in p2m-pt.c)?
Also I'm quite unhappy about the inconsistent state you leave things
in: You unmap from the IOMMU, return an error, but leave the EPT
entry in place.
> --- a/xen/common/grant_table.c
> +++ b/xen/common/grant_table.c
> @@ -932,8 +932,9 @@ __gnttab_map_grant_ref(
> {
> nr_gets++;
> (void)get_page(pg, rd);
> - if ( !(op->flags & GNTMAP_readonly) )
> - get_page_type(pg, PGT_writable_page);
> + if ( !(op->flags & GNTMAP_readonly) &&
> + !get_page_type(pg, PGT_writable_page) )
> + goto could_not_pin;
This needs explanation, as it doesn't look related to what your actual
goal is: If an error was possible here, I think this would be a security
issue. However, as also kind of documented by the explicitly ignored
return value from get_page(), it is my understanding there here we
only obtain an _extra_ reference.
> --- a/xen/common/memory.c
> +++ b/xen/common/memory.c
> @@ -678,8 +678,9 @@ static int xenmem_add_to_physmap(struct domain *d,
> if ( need_iommu(d) )
> {
> this_cpu(iommu_dont_flush_iotlb) = 0;
> - iommu_iotlb_flush(d, xatp->idx - done, done);
> - iommu_iotlb_flush(d, xatp->gpfn - done, done);
> + rc = iommu_iotlb_flush(d, xatp->idx - done, done);
> + if ( !rc )
> + rc = iommu_iotlb_flush(d, xatp->gpfn - done, done);
> }
And the pattern repeats - you now return an error, but you don't
roll back the now failed operation. But wait - maybe that intended:
Are you meaning to crash the guest in such cases (somewhere
deep in the flush code)? If so, I think that's fine, but you
absolutely would need to say so in the commit message.
> --- a/xen/drivers/passthrough/x86/iommu.c
> +++ b/xen/drivers/passthrough/x86/iommu.c
> @@ -104,7 +104,11 @@ int arch_iommu_populate_page_table(struct domain *d)
> this_cpu(iommu_dont_flush_iotlb) = 0;
>
> if ( !rc )
> - iommu_iotlb_flush_all(d);
> + {
> + rc = iommu_iotlb_flush_all(d);
> + if ( rc )
> + iommu_teardown(d);
> + }
> else if ( rc != -ERESTART )
> iommu_teardown(d);
Why can't you just use the existing call to iommu_teardown(), by
simply deleting the "else"?
Jan
_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel
|
![]() |
Lists.xenproject.org is hosted with RackSpace, monitoring our |