|
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] Re: [PATCH] xen/arm: optee: allow plain TMEM buffers with NULL address
Julien Grall writes: > On 19/06/2020 00:29, Volodymyr Babchuk wrote: >> >> Hi Julien, > > Hi Volodymyr, > >> >> Julien Grall writes: >> >>> (+Paul) >>> >>> Hi, >>> >>> On 18/05/2020 02:53, Volodymyr Babchuk wrote: >>>> Trusted Applications use popular approach to determine required size >>>> of buffer: client provides a memory reference with the NULL pointer to >>>> a buffer. This is so called "Null memory reference". TA updates the >>> >>> NIT: You use double space after '.' here but all the others use a >>> single space. >> >> Oops, missed that. >> >>>> reference with the required size and returns it back to client. Then >>>> client allocates buffer of needed size and repeats the operation. >>>> >>>> This behavior is described in TEE Client API Specification, paragraph >>>> 3.2.5. Memory References. >>> >>> From the spec, it is not a clear cut that NULL will always used as >>> fetching the required size of an output buffer. In particular, they >>> suggest to refer to the protocol. >>> >>> In your commit message you indirectly point to an example where 0/NULL >>> would have a different meaning depending on the flags. This is not >>> explained in the TEE Client API Specification. Do you have some >>> pointer I could use to check the behavior? >> >> Well, GP specification describes application interface. It does not >> specifies how implementation should handle this internally. Basically, >> GP defines functions, data types, macros, etc to be used by CAs and >> TAs. But it does not define how exactly call from CA will be delivered >> to TA. Implementation is free to use any means as far, as they conform >> with rules described in the specification. >> >> OPTEE's REE<->TEE interface is described in the header files, that I >> added to xen (optee_msg.h, optee_rpc_cmd.h,optee_smc.h). But it does not >> describe every aspect, unfortunately. > > Thanks for digging-through! More below. > >> >>>> >>>> OP-TEE represents this null memory reference as a TMEM parameter with >>>> buf_ptr == NULL. This is the only case when we should allow TMEM >>>> buffer without the OPTEE_MSG_ATTR_NONCONTIG flag. >>> >>> IIUC, 0 with OPTEE_MSG_ATTR_NONCONTIG set would mean "use the buffer >>> at address 0" but with the flag cleared, it would mean "return the >>> size". Am I correct? >> >> Not exactly. This flag does not affect behavior for buffers with address >> NULL. In any case, this would not mean "return the size" to >> OP-TEE. This is because OP-TEE works as a transport between CA and TA >> and it does not assign any meaning to client buffers. But certainly, >> null buffer will mean "return the size" for some TAs, as described in >> GlobalPlatform specification. > > Does it mean a guest TA may potentially access address 0? TA is running in S-EL0. That buffer with PA=0x0 will be not mapped in TA address space at all. So, if TA will try to access address 0, it will be terminated with data abort. > I am asking that because 0 can be a valid host physical address. We > are currently carving out 0 from the heap allocator to workaround a > bug, but there is no promise this address will be used by the boot > allocator and therefore Xen. > Well, this is a potential issue in OP-TEE. It does not treat 0 as a valid address. So, in that rare case, when REE will try to use 0 as a correct address for data buffer, OP-TEE will not map it into TA address space, instead it will pass NULL to TA, so TA will think that no buffer was provided. >> Reason why I prohibited buffers without OPTEE_MSG_ATTR_NONCONTIG flag in >> the the original patch is that such buffers could span across page >> boundary, which is no-go for fragmented p2m. >> >> But I missed that special case: null buffer without >> OPTEE_MSG_ATTR_NONCONTIG flag. As this is a special type of buffer, it >> can be allowed with and without said flag. > > Looking at translate_noncontig(), there is no specific treatment for > NULL. So the address will get translated. This is likely to result to > an error as usually a guest doesn't have anything mapped at address 0. Yes, you are right. Right now, optee client driver will not emit buffer wit OPTEE_MSG_ATTR_NONCONTIG and address 0. But this is possible. And this should be handled correctly. I'll add fix for that. Today, as well. Thanks for pointing this out. -- Volodymyr Babchuk at EPAM
|
 |
Lists.xenproject.org is hosted with RackSpace, monitoring our |