Thread (52 messages) 52 messages, 4 authors, 2021-10-06

Re: [RFC PATCH 1/1] virtio: write back features before verify

From: "Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@redhat.com>
Date: 2021-10-02 10:21:44
Also in: linux-s390, lkml

On Fri, Oct 01, 2021 at 09:21:25AM +0200, Halil Pasic wrote:
On Thu, 30 Sep 2021 07:12:21 -0400
"Michael S. Tsirkin" [off-list ref] wrote:
quoted
On Thu, Sep 30, 2021 at 03:20:49AM +0200, Halil Pasic wrote:
quoted
This patch fixes a regression introduced by commit 82e89ea077b9
("virtio-blk: Add validation for block size in config space") and
enables similar checks in verify() on big endian platforms.

The problem with checking multi-byte config fields in the verify
callback, on big endian platforms, and with a possibly transitional
device is the following. The verify() callback is called between
config->get_features() and virtio_finalize_features(). That we have a
device that offered F_VERSION_1 then we have the following options
either the device is transitional, and then it has to present the legacy
interface, i.e. a big endian config space until F_VERSION_1 is
negotiated, or we have a non-transitional device, which makes
F_VERSION_1 mandatory, and only implements the non-legacy interface and
thus presents a little endian config space. Because at this point we
can't know if the device is transitional or non-transitional, we can't
know do we need to byte swap or not.  
Hmm which transport does this refer to?
It is the same with virtio-ccw and virtio-pci. I see the same problem
with both on s390x. I didn't try with virtio-blk-pci-non-transitional
yet (have to figure out how to do that with libvirt) for pci I used
virtio-blk-pci.
quoted
Distinguishing between legacy and modern drivers is transport
specific.  PCI presents
legacy and modern at separate addresses so distinguishing
between these two should be no trouble.
You mean the device id? Yes that is bolted down in the spec, but
currently we don't exploit that information. Furthermore there
is a fat chance that with QEMU even the allegedly non-transitional
devices only present a little endian config space after VERSION_1
was negotiated. Namely get_config for virtio-blk is implemented in
virtio_blk_update_config() which does virtio_stl_p(vdev,
&blkcfg.blk_size, blk_size) and in there we don't care
about transitional or not:

static inline bool virtio_access_is_big_endian(VirtIODevice *vdev)
{
#if defined(LEGACY_VIRTIO_IS_BIENDIAN)
    return virtio_is_big_endian(vdev);
#elif defined(TARGET_WORDS_BIGENDIAN)
    if (virtio_vdev_has_feature(vdev, VIRTIO_F_VERSION_1)) {
        /* Devices conforming to VIRTIO 1.0 or later are always LE. */
        return false;
    }
    return true;
#else
    return false;
#endif
}
ok so that's a QEMU bug. Any virtio 1.0 and up
compatible device must use LE.
It can also present a legacy config space where the
endian depends on the guest.
quoted
Channel i/o has versioning so same thing?
Don't think so. Both a transitional and a non-transitional device
would have to accept revisions higher than 0 if the driver tried to
negotiate those (and we do in our case).
Yes, the modern driver does. And that one is known to be LE.
legacy driver doesn't.
quoted
quoted
The virtio spec explicitly states that the driver MAY read config
between reading and writing the features so saying that first accessing
the config before feature negotiation is done is not an option. The
specification ain't clear about setting the features multiple times
before FEATURES_OK, so I guess that should be fine.

I don't consider this patch super clean, but frankly I don't think we
have a ton of options. Another option that may or man not be cleaner,
but is also IMHO much uglier is to figure out whether the device is
transitional by rejecting _F_VERSION_1, then resetting it and proceeding
according tho what we have figured out, hoping that the characteristics
of the device didn't change.  
I am confused here. So is the problem at the device or at the driver level?
We have a driver regression. Since the 82e89ea077b9 ("virtio-blk: Add
validation for block size in config space") virtio-blk is broken on
s390.
Because of a qemu bug. I agree. It's worth working around in the driver
since the qemu bug has been around for a very long time.

The deeper problem is in the spec. We stated that the driver may read
config space before the feature negotiation is finalized, but we didn't
think enough about what happens when native endiannes is not little
endian in the different cases.
Because the spec is very clear that endian-ness is LE.
I don't see a spec issue yet here, just an implementation issue.
I believe, for non-transitional devices we have a problem in the host as
well (i.e. in QEMU).
Because QEMU ignores the spec and instead relies on the feature
negotiation.
quoted
I suspect it's actually the host that has the issue, not
the guest?
I tend to say we have a problem both in the host and in the guest. I'm
more concerned about the problem in the guest, because that is a really
nasty regression.
The problem is in the guest. The bug is in the host ;)
For the host. I think for legacy we don't have a
problem, because both sides would operate on the assumption no
_F_VERSION_1, IMHO the implementation for the transitional devices is
correct.
Well no, the point of transitional is really to be 1.0 compliant
*and* also expose a legacy interface.
For non-transitional flavor, it depends on the device. For
example virtio-net and virtio-blk is broken, because we use primitives
like virtio_stl_p() and those don't do the right thing before feature
negotiation is completed. On the other hand virtio-crypto.c as a truly
non-transitional device uses stl_le_p() and IMHO does the right thing.

Thanks for your comments! I hope I managed to answer your questions. I
need some guidance on how do we want to move forward on this.

Regards,
Halil
OK so. I don't have a problem with the patch itself,
assuming it's enough to work around all buggy hosts.
I am especially worried about things like vhost/vhost-user,
I suspect they might have a bug like this too, and
I am not sure whether your work around is enough for these.
Can you check please?

If not we'll have to move all validate code to after FEATURES_OK
is set.

We do however want to document that this API can be called
multiple times since that was not the case
previously.

Also, I would limit this to when
- the validate callback exists
- the guest endian-ness is not LE

We also want to document the QEMU bug in a comment here,
e.g. 

/*
 * QEMU before version 6.2 incorrectly uses driver features with guest
 * endian-ness to set endian-ness for config space instead of just using
 * LE for the modern interface as per spec.
 * This breaks reading config in the validate callback.
 * To work around that, when device is 1.0 (so supposed to be LE)
 * but guest is not LE, then send the features to device one extra
 * time before validation.
 */

Finally I'd like to see the QEMU bug fix before I merge this one,
since it will be harder to test with a fix.



quoted
quoted
Signed-off-by: Halil Pasic <pasic@linux.ibm.com>
Fixes: 82e89ea077b9 ("virtio-blk: Add validation for block size in config space")
Reported-by: markver@us.ibm.com
---
 drivers/virtio/virtio.c | 4 ++++
 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+)
diff --git a/drivers/virtio/virtio.c b/drivers/virtio/virtio.c
index 0a5b54034d4b..9dc3cfa17b1c 100644
--- a/drivers/virtio/virtio.c
+++ b/drivers/virtio/virtio.c
@@ -249,6 +249,10 @@ static int virtio_dev_probe(struct device *_d)
 		if (device_features & (1ULL << i))
 			__virtio_set_bit(dev, i);
 
+	/* Write back features before validate to know endianness */
+	if (device_features & (1ULL << VIRTIO_F_VERSION_1))
+		dev->config->finalize_features(dev);
+
 	if (drv->validate) {
 		err = drv->validate(dev);
 		if (err)
base-commit: 02d5e016800d082058b3d3b7c3ede136cdc6ddcb
-- 
2.25.1  
_______________________________________________
Virtualization mailing list
Virtualization@lists.linux-foundation.org
https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/virtualization
Keyboard shortcuts
hback out one level
jnext message in thread
kprevious message in thread
ldrill in
Escclose help / fold thread tree
?toggle this help