Re: [PATCH vhost 16/16] vdpa/mlx5: Update cvq iotlb mapping on ASID change

[Eugenio Perez Martin]

On Thu, Oct 5, 2023 at 3:12 PM Dragos Tatulea <dtatulea@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> On Thu, 2023-10-05 at 12:41 +0200, Eugenio Perez Martin wrote:
> > On Thu, Sep 28, 2023 at 6:50 PM Dragos Tatulea <dtatulea@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > >
> > > For the following sequence:
> > > - cvq group is in ASID 0
> > > - .set_map(1, cvq_iotlb)
> > > - .set_group_asid(cvq_group, 1)
> > >
> > > ... the cvq mapping from ASID 0 will be used. This is not always correct
> > > behaviour.
> > >
> > > This patch adds support for the above mentioned flow by saving the iotlb
> > > on each .set_map and updating the cvq iotlb with it on a cvq group change.
> > >
> > > Signed-off-by: Dragos Tatulea <dtatulea@xxxxxxxxxx>
> > > ---
> > >  drivers/vdpa/mlx5/core/mlx5_vdpa.h |  2 ++
> > >  drivers/vdpa/mlx5/core/mr.c        | 26 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> > >  drivers/vdpa/mlx5/net/mlx5_vnet.c  |  9 ++++++++-
> > >  3 files changed, 36 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> > >
> > > diff --git a/drivers/vdpa/mlx5/core/mlx5_vdpa.h
> > > b/drivers/vdpa/mlx5/core/mlx5_vdpa.h
> > > index ae09296f4270..db988ced5a5d 100644
> > > --- a/drivers/vdpa/mlx5/core/mlx5_vdpa.h
> > > +++ b/drivers/vdpa/mlx5/core/mlx5_vdpa.h
> > > @@ -32,6 +32,8 @@ struct mlx5_vdpa_mr {
> > >         unsigned long num_directs;
> > >         unsigned long num_klms;
> > >
> > > +       struct vhost_iotlb *iotlb;
> > > +
> > >         bool user_mr;
> > >  };
> > >
> > > diff --git a/drivers/vdpa/mlx5/core/mr.c b/drivers/vdpa/mlx5/core/mr.c
> > > index a4135c16b5bf..403c08271489 100644
> > > --- a/drivers/vdpa/mlx5/core/mr.c
> > > +++ b/drivers/vdpa/mlx5/core/mr.c
> > > @@ -499,6 +499,8 @@ static void _mlx5_vdpa_destroy_mr(struct mlx5_vdpa_dev
> > > *mvdev, struct mlx5_vdpa_
> > >                 destroy_user_mr(mvdev, mr);
> > >         else
> > >                 destroy_dma_mr(mvdev, mr);
> > > +
> > > +       vhost_iotlb_free(mr->iotlb);
> > >  }
> > >
> > >  void mlx5_vdpa_destroy_mr(struct mlx5_vdpa_dev *mvdev,
> > > @@ -558,6 +560,30 @@ static int _mlx5_vdpa_create_mr(struct mlx5_vdpa_dev
> > > *mvdev,
> > >         else
> > >                 err = create_dma_mr(mvdev, mr);
> > >
> > > +       if (err)
> > > +               return err;
> > > +
> > > +       mr->iotlb = vhost_iotlb_alloc(0, 0);
> > > +       if (!mr->iotlb) {
> > > +               err = -ENOMEM;
> > > +               goto err_mr;
> > > +       }
> > > +
> > > +       err = dup_iotlb(mr->iotlb, iotlb);
> > > +       if (err)
> > > +               goto err_iotlb;
> > > +
> > > +       return 0;
> > > +
> > > +err_iotlb:
> > > +       vhost_iotlb_free(mr->iotlb);
> > > +
> > > +err_mr:
> > > +       if (iotlb)
> > > +               destroy_user_mr(mvdev, mr);
> > > +       else
> > > +               destroy_dma_mr(mvdev, mr);
> > > +
> > >         return err;
> > >  }
> > >
> > > diff --git a/drivers/vdpa/mlx5/net/mlx5_vnet.c
> > > b/drivers/vdpa/mlx5/net/mlx5_vnet.c
> > > index 46441e41892c..fc5d6b989a5a 100644
> > > --- a/drivers/vdpa/mlx5/net/mlx5_vnet.c
> > > +++ b/drivers/vdpa/mlx5/net/mlx5_vnet.c
> > > @@ -3154,12 +3154,19 @@ static int mlx5_set_group_asid(struct vdpa_device
> > > *vdev, u32 group,
> > >                                unsigned int asid)
> > >  {
> > >         struct mlx5_vdpa_dev *mvdev = to_mvdev(vdev);
> > > +       int err = 0;
> > >
> > >         if (group >= MLX5_VDPA_NUMVQ_GROUPS || asid >= MLX5_VDPA_NUM_AS)
> > >                 return -EINVAL;
> > >
> > >         mvdev->group2asid[group] = asid;
> > > -       return 0;
> > > +
> > > +       mutex_lock(&mvdev->mr_mtx);
> > > +       if (group == MLX5_VDPA_CVQ_GROUP && mvdev->mr[asid])
> > > +               err = mlx5_vdpa_update_cvq_iotlb(mvdev, mvdev->mr[asid]-
> > > >iotlb, asid);
> >
> > Do we need to protect here in case userspace sets the same ASID twice?
> > mlx5_vdpa_update_cvq_iotlb shouldn't call dup_iotlb with the same src
> > and dst.
>
> Why would src and dst be identical? Doesn't dup_iotlb create a copy of src?
>

Just in case we're not on the same page, my point is that (malicious?)
userspace is able to trigger it with this patch.

> That being said, there should be a check in dup_iotlb for dst == src. Not sure
> if this is an error or success though...
>

I think it should be a no-op, whatever level it is checked.

Thanks!

> Thanks,
> Dragos
> -
> > Apart from that:
> >
> > Acked-by: Eugenio Pérez <eperezma@xxxxxxxxxx>
> >
> > > +       mutex_unlock(&mvdev->mr_mtx);
> > > +
> > > +       return err;
> > >  }
> > >
> > >  static const struct vdpa_config_ops mlx5_vdpa_ops = {
> > > --
> > > 2.41.0
> > >
> >
>