On 9/25/18 1:17 AM, Peter Xu wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 21, 2018 at 02:25:37PM +0000, Singh, Brijesh wrote:
>> Currently, the amdvi_validate_dte() assumes that a valid DTE will
>> always have V=1. This is not true. The V=1 means that bit[127:1] are
>> valid. A valid DTE can have IV=1 and V=0 (i.e address translation
>> disabled and interrupt remapping enabled)
>>
>> Remove the V=1 check from amdvi_validate_dte(), make the caller
>> responsible to check for V or IV bits.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Brijesh Singh <brijesh.singh@amd.com>
>> Cc: Peter Xu <peterx@redhat.com>
>> Cc: "Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@redhat.com>
>> Cc: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>
>> Cc: Richard Henderson <rth@twiddle.net>
>> Cc: Eduardo Habkost <ehabkost@redhat.com>
>> Cc: Marcel Apfelbaum <marcel.apfelbaum@gmail.com>
>> Cc: Tom Lendacky <Thomas.Lendacky@amd.com>
>> Cc: Suravee Suthikulpanit <Suravee.Suthikulpanit@amd.com>
>> ---
>> hw/i386/amd_iommu.c | 7 ++++---
>> 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/hw/i386/amd_iommu.c b/hw/i386/amd_iommu.c
>> index 1fd669f..f9aae02 100644
>> --- a/hw/i386/amd_iommu.c
>> +++ b/hw/i386/amd_iommu.c
>> @@ -807,7 +807,7 @@ static inline uint64_t amdvi_get_perms(uint64_t entry)
>> AMDVI_DEV_PERM_SHIFT;
>> }
>>
>> -/* a valid entry should have V = 1 and reserved bits honoured */
>> +/* validate that reserved bits are honoured */
>> static bool amdvi_validate_dte(AMDVIState *s, uint16_t devid,
>> uint64_t *dte)
>> {
>> @@ -820,7 +820,7 @@ static bool amdvi_validate_dte(AMDVIState *s, uint16_t devid,
>> return false;
>> }
>>
>> - return dte[0] & AMDVI_DEV_VALID;
>> + return true;
>> }
>>
>> /* get a device table entry given the devid */
>> @@ -967,7 +967,8 @@ static void amdvi_do_translate(AMDVIAddressSpace *as, hwaddr addr,
>> }
>>
>> /* devices with V = 0 are not translated */
>> - if (!amdvi_get_dte(s, devid, entry)) {
>> + if (!amdvi_get_dte(s, devid, entry) ||
>> + !(entry[0] & AMDVI_DEV_VALID)) {
>> goto out;
> The patch itself looks sane to me, but I noticed that when we do "goto
> out" we're actually assuming a default passthrough translation. IMHO
> we should capture the error cases (e.g., non-zero reserved bits) and
> for those instead of doing translations and DMA we should reject the
> translation request and report. Otherwise we might have potential
> risk on guest memory corruption.
>
OK, I can break check as below and log the error
if (!amdvi_get_dte(s, devid, entry)) {
/* log error */
}
if (!(entry[0] & AMDVI_DEV_VALID)) {
goto out; /* pass through */
}
>>
>> --
>> 2.7.4
>>
> Regards,
>