From: Lu Baolu <baolu.lu@linux.intel.com> Date: 2021-01-14 01:42:05
Hi,
Learnt from the discussions in this thread:
https://lore.kernel.org/linux-pci/160408357912.912050.17005584526266191420.stgit@djiang5-desk3.ch.intel.com/
The device IMS (Interrupt Message Storage) should not be enabled in any
virtualization environments unless there is a HYPERCALL domain which
makes the changes in the message store monitored by the hypervisor.
As the initial step, we allow the IMS to be enabled only if we are
running on the bare metal. It's easy to enable IMS in the virtualization
environments if above preconditions are met in the future.
This series is only for comments purpose. We will include it in the Intel
IMS implementation later once we reach a consensus.
Change log:
v2->v3:
- v2:
https://lore.kernel.org/linux-pci/20210106022749.2769057-1-baolu.lu@linux.intel.com/
- Add all identified heuristics so far.
v1->v2:
- v1:
https://lore.kernel.org/linux-pci/20201210004624.345282-1-baolu.lu@linux.intel.com/
- Rename probably_on_bare_metal() with on_bare_metal();
- Some vendors might use the same name for both bare metal and virtual
environment. Before we add vendor specific code to distinguish
between them, let's return false in on_bare_metal(). This won't
introduce any regression. The only impact is that the coming new
platform msi feature won't be supported until the vendor specific code
is provided.
Best regards,
baolu
Lu Baolu (2):
iommu: Add capability IOMMU_CAP_VIOMMU
platform-msi: Add platform check for subdevice irq domain
arch/x86/pci/common.c | 71 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
drivers/base/platform-msi.c | 8 ++++
drivers/iommu/intel/iommu.c | 20 ++++++++++
drivers/iommu/virtio-iommu.c | 9 +++++
include/linux/iommu.h | 1 +
include/linux/msi.h | 1 +
6 files changed, 110 insertions(+)
--
2.25.1
From: Lu Baolu <baolu.lu@linux.intel.com> Date: 2021-01-14 01:42:06
Some vendor IOMMU drivers are able to declare that it is running in a VM
context. This is very valuable for the features that only want to be
supported on bare metal. Add a capability bit so that it could be used.
Signed-off-by: Lu Baolu <baolu.lu@linux.intel.com>
---
drivers/iommu/intel/iommu.c | 20 ++++++++++++++++++++
drivers/iommu/virtio-iommu.c | 9 +++++++++
include/linux/iommu.h | 1 +
3 files changed, 30 insertions(+)
@@ -94,6 +94,7 @@ enum iommu_cap {transactions*/IOMMU_CAP_INTR_REMAP,/* IOMMU supports interrupt isolation */IOMMU_CAP_NOEXEC,/* IOMMU_NOEXEC flag */+IOMMU_CAP_VIOMMU,/* IOMMU can declar running in a VM */};/*
From: Lu Baolu <baolu.lu@linux.intel.com> Date: 2021-01-14 01:43:10
The pci_subdevice_msi_create_irq_domain() should fail if the underlying
platform is not able to support IMS (Interrupt Message Storage). Otherwise,
the isolation of interrupt is not guaranteed.
For x86, IMS is only supported on bare metal for now. We could enable it
in the virtualization environments in the future if interrupt HYPERCALL
domain is supported or the hardware has the capability of interrupt
isolation for subdevices.
Cc: David Woodhouse <redacted>
Cc: Leon Romanovsky <leon@kernel.org>
Cc: Kevin Tian <kevin.tian@intel.com>
Suggested-by: Thomas Gleixner <redacted>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/linux-pci/87pn4nk7nn.fsf@nanos.tec.linutronix.de/
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/linux-pci/877dqrnzr3.fsf@nanos.tec.linutronix.de/
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/linux-pci/877dqqmc2h.fsf@nanos.tec.linutronix.de/
Signed-off-by: Lu Baolu <baolu.lu@linux.intel.com>
---
arch/x86/pci/common.c | 71 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
drivers/base/platform-msi.c | 8 +++++
include/linux/msi.h | 1 +
3 files changed, 80 insertions(+)
@@ -724,3 +725,73 @@ struct pci_dev *pci_real_dma_dev(struct pci_dev *dev)returndev;}#endif++/*+*Wewanttofigureoutwhichcontextwearerunningin.Butthehardware+*doesnotintroduceareliableway(instruction,CPUIDleaf,MSR,whatever)+*whichcanbemanipulatedbytheVMMtolettheOSfigureoutwhereitruns.+*Sowegowiththebelowprobablyon_bare_metal()functionasareplacement+*fordefinitelyon_bare_metal()togoforwardonlyfortheverysimplereason+*thatthisistheonlyoptionwehave.+*/+staticconstchar*constvmm_vendor_name[]={+"QEMU","Bochs","KVM","Xen","VMware","VMW","VMware Inc.",+"innotek GmbH","Oracle Corporation","Parallels","BHYVE"+};++staticvoidread_type0_virtual_machine(conststructdmi_header*dm,void*p)+{+u8*data=(u8*)dm+0x13;++/* BIOS Information (Type 0) */+if(dm->type!=0||dm->length<0x14)+return;++/* Bit 4 of BIOS Characteristics Extension Byte 2*/+if(*data&BIT(4))+*((bool*)p)=true;+}++staticboolsmbios_virtual_machine(void)+{+boolbit_present=false;++dmi_walk(read_type0_virtual_machine,&bit_present);++returnbit_present;+}++staticboolon_bare_metal(structdevice*dev)+{+inti;++if(boot_cpu_has(X86_FEATURE_HYPERVISOR))+returnfalse;++if(smbios_virtual_machine())+returnfalse;++if(iommu_capable(dev->bus,IOMMU_CAP_VIOMMU))+returnfalse;++for(i=0;i<ARRAY_SIZE(vmm_vendor_name);i++)+if(dmi_match(DMI_SYS_VENDOR,vmm_vendor_name[i]))+returnfalse;++pr_info("System running on bare metal, report to bugzilla.kernel.org if not the case.");++returntrue;+}++boolarch_support_pci_device_ims(structpci_dev*pdev)+{+/*+*WhenwearerunninginaVMMcontext,thedeviceIMScouldonlybe+*enabledwhentheunderlyinghardwaresupportsinterruptisolation+*ofthesubdevice,oranymechanism(trap,hypercall)isaddedso+*thatchangesintheinterruptmessagestorecouldbemanagedbythe+*VMM.Fornow,weonlysupportthedeviceIMSwhenwearerunningon+*thebaremetal.+*/+returnon_bare_metal(&pdev->dev);+}
From: Lu Baolu
Sent: Thursday, January 14, 2021 9:30 AM
The pci_subdevice_msi_create_irq_domain() should fail if the underlying
platform is not able to support IMS (Interrupt Message Storage). Otherwise,
the isolation of interrupt is not guaranteed.
For x86, IMS is only supported on bare metal for now. We could enable it
in the virtualization environments in the future if interrupt HYPERCALL
domain is supported or the hardware has the capability of interrupt
isolation for subdevices.
Cc: David Woodhouse <redacted>
Cc: Leon Romanovsky <leon@kernel.org>
Cc: Kevin Tian <kevin.tian@intel.com>
Suggested-by: Thomas Gleixner <redacted>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/linux-
pci/87pn4nk7nn.fsf@nanos.tec.linutronix.de/
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/linux-
pci/877dqrnzr3.fsf@nanos.tec.linutronix.de/
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/linux-
pci/877dqqmc2h.fsf@nanos.tec.linutronix.de/
Signed-off-by: Lu Baolu <baolu.lu@linux.intel.com>
---
arch/x86/pci/common.c | 71
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
drivers/base/platform-msi.c | 8 +++++
include/linux/msi.h | 1 +
3 files changed, 80 insertions(+)
*dev)
return dev;
}
#endif
+
+/*
+ * We want to figure out which context we are running in. But the hardware
+ * does not introduce a reliable way (instruction, CPUID leaf, MSR, whatever)
+ * which can be manipulated by the VMM to let the OS figure out where it
runs.
+ * So we go with the below probably on_bare_metal() function as a
replacement
+ * for definitely on_bare_metal() to go forward only for the very simple
reason
+ * that this is the only option we have.
+ */
+static const char * const vmm_vendor_name[] = {
+ "QEMU", "Bochs", "KVM", "Xen", "VMware", "VMW", "VMware Inc.",
+ "innotek GmbH", "Oracle Corporation", "Parallels", "BHYVE"
+};
+
+static void read_type0_virtual_machine(const struct dmi_header *dm, void
*p)
+{
+ u8 *data = (u8 *)dm + 0x13;
+
+ /* BIOS Information (Type 0) */
+ if (dm->type != 0 || dm->length < 0x14)
+ return;
+
+ /* Bit 4 of BIOS Characteristics Extension Byte 2*/
+ if (*data & BIT(4))
+ *((bool *)p) = true;
+}
+
+static bool smbios_virtual_machine(void)
+{
+ bool bit_present = false;
+
+ dmi_walk(read_type0_virtual_machine, &bit_present);
+
+ return bit_present;
+}
+
+static bool on_bare_metal(struct device *dev)
+{
+ int i;
+
+ if (boot_cpu_has(X86_FEATURE_HYPERVISOR))
+ return false;
+
+ if (smbios_virtual_machine())
+ return false;
+
+ if (iommu_capable(dev->bus, IOMMU_CAP_VIOMMU))
+ return false;
+
+ for (i = 0; i < ARRAY_SIZE(vmm_vendor_name); i++)
+ if (dmi_match(DMI_SYS_VENDOR, vmm_vendor_name[i]))
+ return false;
Thinking more I wonder whether this check is actually useful here. As Leon
and David commented, the same vendor name can be used both for VM
and bare metal instances. It implies that both bare metal and VM might be
misinterpreted with this check. This might not be what we want originally -
find heuristics to indicate a VM environment and tolerate misinterpreting
VM as bare metal in corner cases (but not vice versa).
Thomas?
Thanks
Kevin
From: Leon Romanovsky <leon@kernel.org> Date: 2021-01-14 13:27:28
On Thu, Jan 14, 2021 at 09:30:02AM +0800, Lu Baolu wrote:
Some vendor IOMMU drivers are able to declare that it is running in a VM
context. This is very valuable for the features that only want to be
supported on bare metal. Add a capability bit so that it could be used.
@@ -94,6 +94,7 @@ enum iommu_cap {transactions*/IOMMU_CAP_INTR_REMAP,/* IOMMU supports interrupt isolation */IOMMU_CAP_NOEXEC,/* IOMMU_NOEXEC flag */+IOMMU_CAP_VIOMMU,/* IOMMU can declar running in a VM */};/*--
From: Lu Baolu <baolu.lu@linux.intel.com> Date: 2021-01-15 00:00:03
Hi Leon,
On 1/14/21 9:26 PM, Leon Romanovsky wrote:
On Thu, Jan 14, 2021 at 09:30:02AM +0800, Lu Baolu wrote:
quoted
Some vendor IOMMU drivers are able to declare that it is running in a VM
context. This is very valuable for the features that only want to be
supported on bare metal. Add a capability bit so that it could be used.
And how is it used? Who and how will set it?
Use the existing iommu_capable(). I should add more descriptions about
who and how to use it.
@@ -94,6 +94,7 @@ enum iommu_cap {transactions*/IOMMU_CAP_INTR_REMAP,/* IOMMU supports interrupt isolation */IOMMU_CAP_NOEXEC,/* IOMMU_NOEXEC flag */+IOMMU_CAP_VIOMMU,/* IOMMU can declar running in a VM */};/*--
From: Jason Wang <hidden> Date: 2021-01-15 04:48:43
On 2021/1/14 上午9:30, Lu Baolu wrote:
quoted hunk
Some vendor IOMMU drivers are able to declare that it is running in a VM
context. This is very valuable for the features that only want to be
supported on bare metal. Add a capability bit so that it could be used.
Signed-off-by: Lu Baolu <baolu.lu@linux.intel.com>
---
drivers/iommu/intel/iommu.c | 20 ++++++++++++++++++++
drivers/iommu/virtio-iommu.c | 9 +++++++++
include/linux/iommu.h | 1 +
3 files changed, 30 insertions(+)
@@ -94,6 +94,7 @@ enum iommu_cap {transactions*/IOMMU_CAP_INTR_REMAP,/* IOMMU supports interrupt isolation */IOMMU_CAP_NOEXEC,/* IOMMU_NOEXEC flag */+IOMMU_CAP_VIOMMU,/* IOMMU can declar running in a VM */};/*
From: Leon Romanovsky <leon@kernel.org> Date: 2021-01-15 06:31:59
On Fri, Jan 15, 2021 at 07:49:47AM +0800, Lu Baolu wrote:
Hi Leon,
On 1/14/21 9:26 PM, Leon Romanovsky wrote:
quoted
On Thu, Jan 14, 2021 at 09:30:02AM +0800, Lu Baolu wrote:
quoted
Some vendor IOMMU drivers are able to declare that it is running in a VM
context. This is very valuable for the features that only want to be
supported on bare metal. Add a capability bit so that it could be used.
And how is it used? Who and how will set it?
Use the existing iommu_capable(). I should add more descriptions about
who and how to use it.
I want to see the code that sets this capability.
Thanks
From: Lu Baolu <baolu.lu@linux.intel.com> Date: 2021-01-16 01:22:33
Hi,
On 2021/1/15 14:31, Leon Romanovsky wrote:
On Fri, Jan 15, 2021 at 07:49:47AM +0800, Lu Baolu wrote:
quoted
Hi Leon,
On 1/14/21 9:26 PM, Leon Romanovsky wrote:
quoted
On Thu, Jan 14, 2021 at 09:30:02AM +0800, Lu Baolu wrote:
quoted
Some vendor IOMMU drivers are able to declare that it is running in a VM
context. This is very valuable for the features that only want to be
supported on bare metal. Add a capability bit so that it could be used.
And how is it used? Who and how will set it?
Use the existing iommu_capable(). I should add more descriptions about
who and how to use it.
I want to see the code that sets this capability.
Currently we have Intel VT-d and the virt-iommu setting this capability.
static bool intel_iommu_capable(enum iommu_cap cap)
{
if (cap == IOMMU_CAP_CACHE_COHERENCY)
return domain_update_iommu_snooping(NULL) == 1;
if (cap == IOMMU_CAP_INTR_REMAP)
return irq_remapping_enabled == 1;
+ if (cap == IOMMU_CAP_VIOMMU)
+ return caching_mode_enabled();
return false;
}
And,
+static bool viommu_capable(enum iommu_cap cap)
+{
+ if (cap == IOMMU_CAP_VIOMMU)
+ return true;
+
+ return false;
+}
Best regards,
baolu
From: Leon Romanovsky <leon@kernel.org> Date: 2021-01-16 08:40:13
On Sat, Jan 16, 2021 at 09:20:16AM +0800, Lu Baolu wrote:
Hi,
On 2021/1/15 14:31, Leon Romanovsky wrote:
quoted
On Fri, Jan 15, 2021 at 07:49:47AM +0800, Lu Baolu wrote:
quoted
Hi Leon,
On 1/14/21 9:26 PM, Leon Romanovsky wrote:
quoted
On Thu, Jan 14, 2021 at 09:30:02AM +0800, Lu Baolu wrote:
quoted
Some vendor IOMMU drivers are able to declare that it is running in a VM
context. This is very valuable for the features that only want to be
supported on bare metal. Add a capability bit so that it could be used.
And how is it used? Who and how will set it?
Use the existing iommu_capable(). I should add more descriptions about
who and how to use it.
I want to see the code that sets this capability.
Currently we have Intel VT-d and the virt-iommu setting this capability.
static bool intel_iommu_capable(enum iommu_cap cap)
{
if (cap == IOMMU_CAP_CACHE_COHERENCY)
return domain_update_iommu_snooping(NULL) == 1;
if (cap == IOMMU_CAP_INTR_REMAP)
return irq_remapping_enabled == 1;
+ if (cap == IOMMU_CAP_VIOMMU)
+ return caching_mode_enabled();
return false;
}
And,
+static bool viommu_capable(enum iommu_cap cap)
+{
+ if (cap == IOMMU_CAP_VIOMMU)
+ return true;
+
+ return false;
+}
These two functions are reading this cap and not setting.
Where can I see code that does "cap = IOMMU_CAP_VIOMMU" and not "=="?
From: Lu Baolu <baolu.lu@linux.intel.com> Date: 2021-01-16 08:49:58
Hi Leon,
On 2021/1/16 16:39, Leon Romanovsky wrote:
On Sat, Jan 16, 2021 at 09:20:16AM +0800, Lu Baolu wrote:
quoted
Hi,
On 2021/1/15 14:31, Leon Romanovsky wrote:
quoted
On Fri, Jan 15, 2021 at 07:49:47AM +0800, Lu Baolu wrote:
quoted
Hi Leon,
On 1/14/21 9:26 PM, Leon Romanovsky wrote:
quoted
On Thu, Jan 14, 2021 at 09:30:02AM +0800, Lu Baolu wrote:
quoted
Some vendor IOMMU drivers are able to declare that it is running in a VM
context. This is very valuable for the features that only want to be
supported on bare metal. Add a capability bit so that it could be used.
And how is it used? Who and how will set it?
Use the existing iommu_capable(). I should add more descriptions about
who and how to use it.
I want to see the code that sets this capability.
Currently we have Intel VT-d and the virt-iommu setting this capability.
static bool intel_iommu_capable(enum iommu_cap cap)
{
if (cap == IOMMU_CAP_CACHE_COHERENCY)
return domain_update_iommu_snooping(NULL) == 1;
if (cap == IOMMU_CAP_INTR_REMAP)
return irq_remapping_enabled == 1;
+ if (cap == IOMMU_CAP_VIOMMU)
+ return caching_mode_enabled();
return false;
}
And,
+static bool viommu_capable(enum iommu_cap cap)
+{
+ if (cap == IOMMU_CAP_VIOMMU)
+ return true;
+
+ return false;
+}
These two functions are reading this cap and not setting.
Where can I see code that does "cap = IOMMU_CAP_VIOMMU" and not "=="?
The iommu_capable() is a generic IOMMU interface to query IOMMU
capabilities. It takes @bus and @cap as input, and calls the callback
of vendor iommu. If the vendor iommu driver supports the specific
capability, it returns true. Otherwise, it returns false.
bool iommu_capable(struct bus_type *bus, enum iommu_cap cap)
{
if (!bus->iommu_ops || !bus->iommu_ops->capable)
return false;
return bus->iommu_ops->capable(cap);
}
EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(iommu_capable);
In the vendor iommu's callback, it checks the capability and returns a
value according to its capability, just as showed above.
Best regards,
baolu
From: Leon Romanovsky <leon@kernel.org> Date: 2021-01-17 05:31:43
On Sat, Jan 16, 2021 at 04:47:40PM +0800, Lu Baolu wrote:
Hi Leon,
On 2021/1/16 16:39, Leon Romanovsky wrote:
quoted
On Sat, Jan 16, 2021 at 09:20:16AM +0800, Lu Baolu wrote:
quoted
Hi,
On 2021/1/15 14:31, Leon Romanovsky wrote:
quoted
On Fri, Jan 15, 2021 at 07:49:47AM +0800, Lu Baolu wrote:
quoted
Hi Leon,
On 1/14/21 9:26 PM, Leon Romanovsky wrote:
quoted
On Thu, Jan 14, 2021 at 09:30:02AM +0800, Lu Baolu wrote:
quoted
Some vendor IOMMU drivers are able to declare that it is running in a VM
context. This is very valuable for the features that only want to be
supported on bare metal. Add a capability bit so that it could be used.
And how is it used? Who and how will set it?
Use the existing iommu_capable(). I should add more descriptions about
who and how to use it.
I want to see the code that sets this capability.
Currently we have Intel VT-d and the virt-iommu setting this capability.
static bool intel_iommu_capable(enum iommu_cap cap)
{
if (cap == IOMMU_CAP_CACHE_COHERENCY)
return domain_update_iommu_snooping(NULL) == 1;
if (cap == IOMMU_CAP_INTR_REMAP)
return irq_remapping_enabled == 1;
+ if (cap == IOMMU_CAP_VIOMMU)
+ return caching_mode_enabled();
return false;
}
And,
+static bool viommu_capable(enum iommu_cap cap)
+{
+ if (cap == IOMMU_CAP_VIOMMU)
+ return true;
+
+ return false;
+}
These two functions are reading this cap and not setting.
Where can I see code that does "cap = IOMMU_CAP_VIOMMU" and not "=="?
The iommu_capable() is a generic IOMMU interface to query IOMMU
capabilities. It takes @bus and @cap as input, and calls the callback
of vendor iommu. If the vendor iommu driver supports the specific
capability, it returns true. Otherwise, it returns false.
bool iommu_capable(struct bus_type *bus, enum iommu_cap cap)
{
if (!bus->iommu_ops || !bus->iommu_ops->capable)
return false;
return bus->iommu_ops->capable(cap);
}
EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(iommu_capable);
In the vendor iommu's callback, it checks the capability and returns a
value according to its capability, just as showed above.
Ohh, sorry.
I missed "iommu_capable(dev->bus, IOMMU_CAP_VIOMMU)" from second patch.
Thanks