Re: [PATCH] swiotlb: Validate bounce size in the sync/unmap path

2021-02-09 Thread Christoph Hellwig
On Mon, Feb 08, 2021 at 12:14:49PM -0500, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk wrote: > > ring buffer or whatever because you know I/O will be copied anyway > > and none of all the hard work higher layers do to make the I/O suitable > > for a normal device apply. > > I lost you here. Sorry, are you saying have a

Re: [PATCH] swiotlb: Validate bounce size in the sync/unmap path

2021-02-08 Thread Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk
On Fri, Feb 05, 2021 at 06:58:52PM +0100, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > On Wed, Feb 03, 2021 at 02:36:38PM -0500, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk wrote: > > > So what? If you guys want to provide a new capability you'll have to do > > > work. And designing a new protocol based around the fact that the > > > h

Re: [PATCH] swiotlb: Validate bounce size in the sync/unmap path

2021-02-05 Thread Christoph Hellwig
On Wed, Feb 03, 2021 at 02:36:38PM -0500, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk wrote: > > So what? If you guys want to provide a new capability you'll have to do > > work. And designing a new protocol based around the fact that the > > hardware/hypervisor is not trusted and a copy is always required makes > > a

Re: [PATCH] swiotlb: Validate bounce size in the sync/unmap path

2021-02-03 Thread Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk
On Wed, Feb 03, 2021 at 01:49:22PM +0100, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > On Mon, Jan 18, 2021 at 12:44:58PM +0100, Martin Radev wrote: > > Your comment makes sense but then that would require the cooperation > > of these vendors and the cloud providers to agree on something meaningful. > > I am also no

Re: [PATCH] swiotlb: Validate bounce size in the sync/unmap path

2021-02-03 Thread Christoph Hellwig
On Mon, Jan 18, 2021 at 12:44:58PM +0100, Martin Radev wrote: > Your comment makes sense but then that would require the cooperation > of these vendors and the cloud providers to agree on something meaningful. > I am also not sure whether the end result would be better than hardening > this interfa

Re: [PATCH] swiotlb: Validate bounce size in the sync/unmap path

2021-02-02 Thread Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk
On Tue, Feb 02, 2021 at 04:34:09PM -0600, Tom Lendacky wrote: > On 2/2/21 10:37 AM, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk wrote: > > On Mon, Jan 25, 2021 at 07:33:35PM +0100, Martin Radev wrote: > >> On Mon, Jan 18, 2021 at 10:14:28AM -0500, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk wrote: > >>> On Mon, Jan 18, 2021 at 12:44:58PM +01

Re: [PATCH] swiotlb: Validate bounce size in the sync/unmap path

2021-02-02 Thread Tom Lendacky
On 2/2/21 10:37 AM, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk wrote: > On Mon, Jan 25, 2021 at 07:33:35PM +0100, Martin Radev wrote: >> On Mon, Jan 18, 2021 at 10:14:28AM -0500, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk wrote: >>> On Mon, Jan 18, 2021 at 12:44:58PM +0100, Martin Radev wrote: On Wed, Jan 13, 2021 at 12:30:17PM +0100,

Re: [PATCH] swiotlb: Validate bounce size in the sync/unmap path

2021-02-02 Thread Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk
On Mon, Jan 25, 2021 at 07:33:35PM +0100, Martin Radev wrote: > On Mon, Jan 18, 2021 at 10:14:28AM -0500, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk wrote: > > On Mon, Jan 18, 2021 at 12:44:58PM +0100, Martin Radev wrote: > > > On Wed, Jan 13, 2021 at 12:30:17PM +0100, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > > > > On Tue, Jan 12, 2

Re: [PATCH] swiotlb: Validate bounce size in the sync/unmap path

2021-01-25 Thread Martin Radev
On Mon, Jan 18, 2021 at 10:14:28AM -0500, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk wrote: > On Mon, Jan 18, 2021 at 12:44:58PM +0100, Martin Radev wrote: > > On Wed, Jan 13, 2021 at 12:30:17PM +0100, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > > > On Tue, Jan 12, 2021 at 04:07:29PM +0100, Martin Radev wrote: > > > > The size of the b

Re: [PATCH] swiotlb: Validate bounce size in the sync/unmap path

2021-01-18 Thread Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk
On Mon, Jan 18, 2021 at 12:44:58PM +0100, Martin Radev wrote: > On Wed, Jan 13, 2021 at 12:30:17PM +0100, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > > On Tue, Jan 12, 2021 at 04:07:29PM +0100, Martin Radev wrote: > > > The size of the buffer being bounced is not checked if it happens > > > to be larger than the si

Re: [PATCH] swiotlb: Validate bounce size in the sync/unmap path

2021-01-18 Thread Martin Radev
On Wed, Jan 13, 2021 at 12:30:17PM +0100, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > On Tue, Jan 12, 2021 at 04:07:29PM +0100, Martin Radev wrote: > > The size of the buffer being bounced is not checked if it happens > > to be larger than the size of the mapped buffer. Because the size > > can be controlled by a d

Re: [PATCH] swiotlb: Validate bounce size in the sync/unmap path

2021-01-13 Thread Christoph Hellwig
On Tue, Jan 12, 2021 at 04:07:29PM +0100, Martin Radev wrote: > The size of the buffer being bounced is not checked if it happens > to be larger than the size of the mapped buffer. Because the size > can be controlled by a device, as it's the case with virtio devices, > this can lead to memory corr