[PATCH v3 0/2] arm_ffa, KVM: Fix FF-A emad offset calculations

Sebastian Ene posted 2 patches 1 month ago
There is a newer version of this series
arch/arm64/kvm/hyp/nvhe/ffa.c     | 24 ++++++++++++++++++------
drivers/firmware/arm_ffa/driver.c | 14 ++++++++++----
include/linux/arm_ffa.h           |  2 +-
3 files changed, 29 insertions(+), 11 deletions(-)
[PATCH v3 0/2] arm_ffa, KVM: Fix FF-A emad offset calculations
Posted by Sebastian Ene 1 month ago
Hi all,

This series fixes the Endpoint Memory Access Descriptor (EMAD) offset calculations
and adds the necessary bounds checks for both the core FF-A driver and the pKVM
hypervisor.

Prior to FF-A version 1.1, the memory region header didn't specify an explicit offset
for the EMADs, leading to the assumption that they immediately follow the header.
However, from v1.1 onwards, the specification dictates using the `ep_mem_offset` field
to determine the start of the memory access array.

The patches in this series address this by:
1. Updating the core `arm_ffa` firmware driver to correctly calculate the descriptor
   offset using `ep_mem_offset` rather than defaulting to `sizeof(struct ffa_mem_region)`.
   It also introduces bounds checking against `max_fragsize`.
2. Enhancing the pKVM hypervisor validation logic to no longer strictly enforce that
   the descriptor strictly follows the header, aligning it with the driver behavior
   and the FF-A specification, while also ensuring the offset falls within the mailbox
   buffer bounds.

Changelog
#########

v2 -> this:
- Fixed typo in nvhe/ffa.c (missing sizeof)

v1 -> v2:
- For pKVM, removed the strict placement enforcement for `ep_mem_offset` as it is not
  compliant with the spec, and avoids making assumptions about the driver's memory
  layout.

Link to:
########

v2: https://lore.kernel.org/all/20260430160241.1934777-1-sebastianene@google.com/
v1: https://lore.kernel.org/all/ae9KN9nkOgDYJcGP@google.com/T/#t

Sebastian Ene (2):
  firmware: arm_ffa: Fix Endpoint Memory Access Descriptor offset
    calculation
  KVM: arm64: Validate the offset to the mem access descriptor

 arch/arm64/kvm/hyp/nvhe/ffa.c     | 24 ++++++++++++++++++------
 drivers/firmware/arm_ffa/driver.c | 14 ++++++++++----
 include/linux/arm_ffa.h           |  2 +-
 3 files changed, 29 insertions(+), 11 deletions(-)

-- 
2.54.0.563.g4f69b47b94-goog
Re: [PATCH v3 0/2] arm_ffa, KVM: Fix FF-A emad offset calculations
Posted by Sudeep Holla 1 month ago
On Tue, May 12, 2026 at 12:44:40PM +0000, Sebastian Ene wrote:
> Hi all,
> 
> This series fixes the Endpoint Memory Access Descriptor (EMAD) offset calculations
> and adds the necessary bounds checks for both the core FF-A driver and the pKVM
> hypervisor.
> 
> Prior to FF-A version 1.1, the memory region header didn't specify an explicit offset
> for the EMADs, leading to the assumption that they immediately follow the header.
> However, from v1.1 onwards, the specification dictates using the `ep_mem_offset` field
> to determine the start of the memory access array.
> 
> The patches in this series address this by:
> 1. Updating the core `arm_ffa` firmware driver to correctly calculate the descriptor
>    offset using `ep_mem_offset` rather than defaulting to `sizeof(struct ffa_mem_region)`.
>    It also introduces bounds checking against `max_fragsize`.
> 2. Enhancing the pKVM hypervisor validation logic to no longer strictly enforce that
>    the descriptor strictly follows the header, aligning it with the driver behavior
>    and the FF-A specification, while also ensuring the offset falls within the mailbox
>    buffer bounds.
>

Looks good apart from the minor nits, but how do you plan to route these
changes as they are dependent for functionality but not for the build IIUC.

I don't think I have any conflicting change so far, so it can go along with
other pKVM changes. Let me know.

> Changelog
> #########
> 
> v2 -> this:
> - Fixed typo in nvhe/ffa.c (missing sizeof)
> 
> v1 -> v2:
> - For pKVM, removed the strict placement enforcement for `ep_mem_offset` as it is not
>   compliant with the spec, and avoids making assumptions about the driver's memory
>   layout.
> 
> Link to:
> ########
> 
> v2: https://lore.kernel.org/all/20260430160241.1934777-1-sebastianene@google.com/
> v1: https://lore.kernel.org/all/ae9KN9nkOgDYJcGP@google.com/T/#t
> 
> Sebastian Ene (2):
>   firmware: arm_ffa: Fix Endpoint Memory Access Descriptor offset
>     calculation
>   KVM: arm64: Validate the offset to the mem access descriptor
> 
>  arch/arm64/kvm/hyp/nvhe/ffa.c     | 24 ++++++++++++++++++------
>  drivers/firmware/arm_ffa/driver.c | 14 ++++++++++----
>  include/linux/arm_ffa.h           |  2 +-
>  3 files changed, 29 insertions(+), 11 deletions(-)
> 
> -- 
> 2.54.0.563.g4f69b47b94-goog
> 

-- 
Regards,
Sudeep
Re: [PATCH v3 0/2] arm_ffa, KVM: Fix FF-A emad offset calculations
Posted by Sudeep Holla 3 weeks, 4 days ago
On Wed, May 13, 2026 at 06:23:43PM +0100, Sudeep Holla wrote:
> On Tue, May 12, 2026 at 12:44:40PM +0000, Sebastian Ene wrote:
> > Hi all,
> > 
> > This series fixes the Endpoint Memory Access Descriptor (EMAD) offset calculations
> > and adds the necessary bounds checks for both the core FF-A driver and the pKVM
> > hypervisor.
> > 
> > Prior to FF-A version 1.1, the memory region header didn't specify an explicit offset
> > for the EMADs, leading to the assumption that they immediately follow the header.
> > However, from v1.1 onwards, the specification dictates using the `ep_mem_offset` field
> > to determine the start of the memory access array.
> > 
> > The patches in this series address this by:
> > 1. Updating the core `arm_ffa` firmware driver to correctly calculate the descriptor
> >    offset using `ep_mem_offset` rather than defaulting to `sizeof(struct ffa_mem_region)`.
> >    It also introduces bounds checking against `max_fragsize`.
> > 2. Enhancing the pKVM hypervisor validation logic to no longer strictly enforce that
> >    the descriptor strictly follows the header, aligning it with the driver behavior
> >    and the FF-A specification, while also ensuring the offset falls within the mailbox
> >    buffer bounds.
> >
> 
> Looks good apart from the minor nits, but how do you plan to route these
> changes as they are dependent for functionality but not for the build IIUC.
>

You can add (with minor nit fixed) my

Reviewed-by:  Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@kernel.org>

if it is routed via KVM or other tree.

-- 
Regards,
Sudeep