[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] Re: [PATCH] xen/arm: optee: allow plain TMEM buffers with NULL address
Hi Volodymyr, On 19/06/2020 10:52, Volodymyr Babchuk wrote: 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. Thanks! That's reassuring. Although, I think we may still need to prevent MFN 0 to be allocated for a guest using OP-TEE. So they don't end up with weird failure. I don't think this is an issue so far, but this may change with Stefano's dom0less series to support direct mapping. Cheers, -- Julien Grall
|
Lists.xenproject.org is hosted with RackSpace, monitoring our |