From: Robin Murphy <robin.murphy@arm.com>
To: yf.wang@mediatek.com, Joerg Roedel <joro@8bytes.org>,
Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>,
Matthias Brugger <matthias.bgg@gmail.com>,
"open list:IOMMU DMA-API LAYER" <iommu@lists.linux.dev>,
open list <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
"moderated list:ARM/Mediatek SoC support"
<linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>,
"moderated list:ARM/Mediatek SoC support"
<linux-mediatek@lists.infradead.org>
Cc: wsd_upstream@mediatek.com, Libo Kang <Libo.Kang@mediatek.com>,
Yong Wu <yong.wu@mediatek.com>, Ning Li <Ning.Li@mediatek.com>,
jianjiao zeng <jianjiao.zeng@mediatek.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] iommu/iova: Fix alloc iova overflows issue
Date: Mon, 9 Jan 2023 11:47:21 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <99695d77-e54f-3270-ee9a-9b3cbb3296e5@arm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20230109083429.25622-1-yf.wang@mediatek.com>
On 2023-01-09 08:34, yf.wang@mediatek.com wrote:
> From: Yunfei Wang <yf.wang@mediatek.com>
>
> In __alloc_and_insert_iova_range, there is an issue that retry_pfn
> overflows. The value of iovad->anchor.pfn_hi is ~0UL, then when
> iovad->cached_node is iovad->anchor, curr_iova->pfn_hi + 1 will
> overflow. As a result, if the retry logic is executed, low_pfn is
> updated to 0, and then new_pfn < low_pfn returns false to make the
> allocation successful.
>
> This issue occurs in the following two situations:
> 1. The first iova size exceeds the domain size. When initializing
> iova domain, iovad->cached_node is assigned as iovad->anchor. For
> example, the iova domain size is 10M, start_pfn is 0x1_F000_0000,
> and the iova size allocated for the first time is 11M. The
> following is the log information, new->pfn_lo is smaller than
> iovad->cached_node.
>
> Example log:
> [ 223.798112][T1705487] sh: [name:iova&]__alloc_and_insert_iova_range
> start_pfn:0x1f0000,retry_pfn:0x0,size:0xb00,limit_pfn:0x1f0a00
> [ 223.799590][T1705487] sh: [name:iova&]__alloc_and_insert_iova_range
> success start_pfn:0x1f0000,new->pfn_lo:0x1efe00,new->pfn_hi:0x1f08ff
>
> 2. The node with the largest iova->pfn_lo value in the iova domain
> is deleted, iovad->cached_node will be updated to iovad->anchor,
> and then the alloc iova size exceeds the maximum iova size that can
> be allocated in the domain.
>
> Adding judgment that retry_pfn must be greater than iovad->start_pfn
> can fix this issue.
Hmm, indeed that's a sneaky little bug - thanks for the thorough
analysis - but couldn't we avoid the overflow entirely? I don't have the
complete logic paged in, but superficially it seems like:
retry_pfn = curr_iova->pfn_hi;
...
retry_pfn <= limit_pfn
...
low_pfn = retry_pfn + 1;
should still work, shouldn't it?
Thanks,
Robin.
> Signed-off-by: jianjiao zeng <jianjiao.zeng@mediatek.com>
> Signed-off-by: Yunfei Wang <yf.wang@mediatek.com>
> ---
> drivers/iommu/iova.c | 3 ++-
> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/iommu/iova.c b/drivers/iommu/iova.c
> index a44ad92fc5eb..0073206c2a95 100644
> --- a/drivers/iommu/iova.c
> +++ b/drivers/iommu/iova.c
> @@ -209,7 +209,8 @@ static int __alloc_and_insert_iova_range(struct iova_domain *iovad,
> } while (curr && new_pfn <= curr_iova->pfn_hi && new_pfn >= low_pfn);
>
> if (high_pfn < size || new_pfn < low_pfn) {
> - if (low_pfn == iovad->start_pfn && retry_pfn < limit_pfn) {
> + if (low_pfn == iovad->start_pfn &&
> + retry_pfn >= iovad->start_pfn && retry_pfn < limit_pfn) {
> high_pfn = limit_pfn;
> low_pfn = retry_pfn;
> curr = iova_find_limit(iovad, limit_pfn);
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2023-01-09 11:47 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 3+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2023-01-09 8:34 yf.wang
2023-01-09 11:47 ` Robin Murphy [this message]
2023-01-11 5:57 ` yf.wang
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=99695d77-e54f-3270-ee9a-9b3cbb3296e5@arm.com \
--to=robin.murphy@arm.com \
--cc=Libo.Kang@mediatek.com \
--cc=Ning.Li@mediatek.com \
--cc=iommu@lists.linux.dev \
--cc=jianjiao.zeng@mediatek.com \
--cc=joro@8bytes.org \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mediatek@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=matthias.bgg@gmail.com \
--cc=will@kernel.org \
--cc=wsd_upstream@mediatek.com \
--cc=yf.wang@mediatek.com \
--cc=yong.wu@mediatek.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox
all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®