From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-8.3 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,NICE_REPLY_A, SIGNED_OFF_BY,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,USER_AGENT_SANE_1 autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1088EC2D0E2 for ; Tue, 22 Sep 2020 16:57:53 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 87830235FD for ; Tue, 22 Sep 2020 16:57:52 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=ibm.com header.i=@ibm.com header.b="YmggHKmC" Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1726643AbgIVQ5v (ORCPT ); Tue, 22 Sep 2020 12:57:51 -0400 Received: from mx0b-001b2d01.pphosted.com ([148.163.158.5]:60172 "EHLO mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1726558AbgIVQ5v (ORCPT ); Tue, 22 Sep 2020 12:57:51 -0400 Received: from pps.filterd (m0098413.ppops.net [127.0.0.1]) by mx0b-001b2d01.pphosted.com (8.16.0.42/8.16.0.42) with SMTP id 08MGal9w170201; Tue, 22 Sep 2020 12:57:42 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=ibm.com; h=subject : to : cc : references : from : message-id : date : mime-version : in-reply-to : content-type : content-transfer-encoding; s=pp1; bh=IynCvLd1jIJZLfDQaEKMgt3CmHMxuUcagJiB0ZYpszE=; b=YmggHKmC3kCocOv6ugHJjMTUtybR4c5NqxrRilvmqivLT0BeplKnX/JpV72ZKkouuv0o jP/dErX6fNUAYuLklZb/q7NOUYpq7pF0rwLi987Aslud/Jrdb6YxLGkEakGEFz5R7wi+ j/VU00fXitRHjBbdIlcnHX0gfRrwx0liwcnrmfiPJ4kaxecH7NnwK0Q4Q4p2xU7kWvPp gti2yIGx3QsSmmY2VgmjSsbn/HOXcWnVv9XV+FLqOTrxyJ5ZsnNFTzOlop9MitH/NC1s MhjvpVe111j0LiskKZ5eG5Vx/X1aWPIqhIeoqp2Xa9Bm2aYY8woe/iurDqWj3WSSIx+4 tQ== Received: from pps.reinject (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mx0b-001b2d01.pphosted.com with ESMTP id 33qkyp2frf-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Tue, 22 Sep 2020 12:57:42 -0400 Received: from m0098413.ppops.net (m0098413.ppops.net [127.0.0.1]) by pps.reinject (8.16.0.36/8.16.0.36) with SMTP id 08MGbFgQ171655; Tue, 22 Sep 2020 12:57:41 -0400 Received: from ppma05wdc.us.ibm.com (1b.90.2fa9.ip4.static.sl-reverse.com [169.47.144.27]) by mx0b-001b2d01.pphosted.com with ESMTP id 33qkyp2fqt-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Tue, 22 Sep 2020 12:57:41 -0400 Received: from pps.filterd (ppma05wdc.us.ibm.com [127.0.0.1]) by ppma05wdc.us.ibm.com (8.16.0.42/8.16.0.42) with SMTP id 08MGs1xp014856; Tue, 22 Sep 2020 16:57:40 GMT Received: from b03cxnp07029.gho.boulder.ibm.com (b03cxnp07029.gho.boulder.ibm.com [9.17.130.16]) by ppma05wdc.us.ibm.com with ESMTP id 33n9m90e36-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Tue, 22 Sep 2020 16:57:40 +0000 Received: from b03ledav006.gho.boulder.ibm.com (b03ledav006.gho.boulder.ibm.com [9.17.130.237]) by b03cxnp07029.gho.boulder.ibm.com (8.14.9/8.14.9/NCO v10.0) with ESMTP id 08MGvdR328377404 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=OK); Tue, 22 Sep 2020 16:57:39 GMT Received: from b03ledav006.gho.boulder.ibm.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by IMSVA (Postfix) with ESMTP id 34903C6057; Tue, 22 Sep 2020 16:57:39 +0000 (GMT) Received: from b03ledav006.gho.boulder.ibm.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by IMSVA (Postfix) with ESMTP id D21B4C6055; Tue, 22 Sep 2020 16:57:37 +0000 (GMT) Received: from oc4221205838.ibm.com (unknown [9.163.16.144]) by b03ledav006.gho.boulder.ibm.com (Postfix) with ESMTP; Tue, 22 Sep 2020 16:57:37 +0000 (GMT) Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 3/3] vfio/pci: Decouple PCI_COMMAND_MEMORY bit checks from is_virtfn To: Alex Williamson Cc: bhelgaas@google.com, schnelle@linux.ibm.com, pmorel@linux.ibm.com, mpe@ellerman.id.au, oohall@gmail.com, cohuck@redhat.com, kevin.tian@intel.com, hca@linux.ibm.com, gor@linux.ibm.com, borntraeger@de.ibm.com, linux-s390@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, kvm@vger.kernel.org, linux-pci@vger.kernel.org References: <1599749997-30489-1-git-send-email-mjrosato@linux.ibm.com> <1599749997-30489-4-git-send-email-mjrosato@linux.ibm.com> <08afc6b2-7549-5440-a947-af0b598288c2@linux.ibm.com> <20200922104030.07e0dfd9@x1.home> From: Matthew Rosato Message-ID: <852ca3a6-6521-a3c4-c70d-383be3c2dc2d@linux.ibm.com> Date: Tue, 22 Sep 2020 12:57:37 -0400 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/68.11.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20200922104030.07e0dfd9@x1.home> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-TM-AS-GCONF: 00 X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=fsecure engine=2.50.10434:6.0.235,18.0.687 definitions=2020-09-22_16:2020-09-21,2020-09-22 signatures=0 X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=outbound_notspam policy=outbound score=0 priorityscore=1501 malwarescore=0 suspectscore=0 lowpriorityscore=0 mlxscore=0 clxscore=1015 adultscore=0 bulkscore=0 spamscore=0 mlxlogscore=999 phishscore=0 impostorscore=0 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=8.12.0-2006250000 definitions=main-2009220122 Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 9/22/20 12:40 PM, Alex Williamson wrote: > On Mon, 21 Sep 2020 08:43:29 -0400 > Matthew Rosato wrote: > >> On 9/10/20 10:59 AM, Matthew Rosato wrote: >>> While it is true that devices with is_virtfn=1 will have a Memory Space >>> Enable bit that is hard-wired to 0, this is not the only case where we >>> see this behavior -- For example some bare-metal hypervisors lack >>> Memory Space Enable bit emulation for devices not setting is_virtfn >>> (s390). Fix this by instead checking for the newly-added >>> no_command_memory bit which directly denotes the need for >>> PCI_COMMAND_MEMORY emulation in vfio. >>> >>> Fixes: abafbc551fdd ("vfio-pci: Invalidate mmaps and block MMIO access on disabled memory") >>> Signed-off-by: Matthew Rosato >>> Reviewed-by: Niklas Schnelle >>> Reviewed-by: Pierre Morel >> >> Polite ping on this patch as the other 2 have now received maintainer >> ACKs or reviews. I'm concerned about this popping up in distros as >> abafbc551fdd was a CVE fix. Related, see question from the cover: >> >> - Restored the fixes tag to patch 3 (but the other 2 patches are >> now pre-reqs -- cc stable 5.8?) > > I've got these queued in my local branch which I'll push to next for > v5.10. I'm thinking that perhaps the right thing would be to add the > fixes tag to all three patches, otherwise I could see that the PCI/VF > change might get picked as a dependency, but not the s390 specific one. > Does this sound correct to everyone? Thanks, Sounds good to me. Thanks!