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 4E44DC4727E for ; Wed, 23 Sep 2020 08:51:55 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id EDB4220756 for ; Wed, 23 Sep 2020 08:51:54 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=ibm.com header.i=@ibm.com header.b="sNMx1rup" Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1726465AbgIWIvy (ORCPT ); Wed, 23 Sep 2020 04:51:54 -0400 Received: from mx0b-001b2d01.pphosted.com ([148.163.158.5]:59250 "EHLO mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1726130AbgIWIvx (ORCPT ); Wed, 23 Sep 2020 04:51:53 -0400 Received: from pps.filterd (m0098420.ppops.net [127.0.0.1]) by mx0b-001b2d01.pphosted.com (8.16.0.42/8.16.0.42) with SMTP id 08N8WW9M145621; Wed, 23 Sep 2020 04:51:43 -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=2XXRDnFO/61UBTTV4Z8JpRj9BrTLJ0R2VP3pc0tFfPI=; b=sNMx1ruptdj/TwZ10RigDrrUPiRBSEmrScUoRpdq8pBtZyMKqU5cuMCI359HywyNZrtp QwMnDn1loieWc1+tOfIfK5Vv4SHDIUPmRZFoI9WJkJzo3FkMGUIJXYUxsFdT526Xf1Q+ G4rit3F1vT0qp32Oz8IVnFonJv6nw2enKRk8S16uKLN9Avr1Fe4MHxi5NsC69E71uEIT memXtqaz5dUThNQcFPlsd1S8QOZUTZm0x0RY+XgV6x4jmaWjoIvTwegqxwZvlzsr/Ttg +nUpwP5OdaUo/XRDkaE0opWwzGm7etFlbUhpI4yIfAb8TmrtoAw174Kd2D9ICkwP4QM8 zg== Received: from pps.reinject (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mx0b-001b2d01.pphosted.com with ESMTP id 33r164c1en-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Wed, 23 Sep 2020 04:51:42 -0400 Received: from m0098420.ppops.net (m0098420.ppops.net [127.0.0.1]) by pps.reinject (8.16.0.36/8.16.0.36) with SMTP id 08N8XgL9150134; Wed, 23 Sep 2020 04:51:42 -0400 Received: from ppma06fra.de.ibm.com (48.49.7a9f.ip4.static.sl-reverse.com [159.122.73.72]) by mx0b-001b2d01.pphosted.com with ESMTP id 33r164c1dt-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Wed, 23 Sep 2020 04:51:42 -0400 Received: from pps.filterd (ppma06fra.de.ibm.com [127.0.0.1]) by ppma06fra.de.ibm.com (8.16.0.42/8.16.0.42) with SMTP id 08N8lNlI021274; Wed, 23 Sep 2020 08:51:40 GMT Received: from b06avi18626390.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (b06avi18626390.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com [9.149.26.192]) by ppma06fra.de.ibm.com with ESMTP id 33n98gt2gr-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Wed, 23 Sep 2020 08:51:40 +0000 Received: from d06av24.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (d06av24.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com [9.149.105.60]) by b06avi18626390.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (8.14.9/8.14.9/NCO v10.0) with ESMTP id 08N8o2O833751458 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=OK); Wed, 23 Sep 2020 08:50:02 GMT Received: from d06av24.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by IMSVA (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9225A4204B; Wed, 23 Sep 2020 08:51:37 +0000 (GMT) Received: from d06av24.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by IMSVA (Postfix) with ESMTP id DAC4942041; Wed, 23 Sep 2020 08:51:36 +0000 (GMT) Received: from oc3016276355.ibm.com (unknown [9.145.32.68]) by d06av24.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (Postfix) with ESMTP; Wed, 23 Sep 2020 08:51:36 +0000 (GMT) Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 3/3] vfio/pci: Decouple PCI_COMMAND_MEMORY bit checks from is_virtfn To: Alex Williamson , Matthew Rosato Cc: bhelgaas@google.com, schnelle@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: Pierre Morel Message-ID: Date: Wed, 23 Sep 2020 10:51:36 +0200 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=2020-09-23_03:2020-09-23,2020-09-23 signatures=0 X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=outbound_notspam policy=outbound score=0 priorityscore=1501 adultscore=0 impostorscore=0 mlxlogscore=999 malwarescore=0 spamscore=0 phishscore=0 suspectscore=0 mlxscore=0 clxscore=1011 bulkscore=0 lowpriorityscore=0 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=8.12.0-2006250000 definitions=main-2009230064 Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 2020-09-22 18:40, 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, > > Alex > sound correct for me. Thanks. Pierre -- Pierre Morel IBM Lab Boeblingen