Skip to contentSkip to conversation

vfio: Filter out bogus mappings

PATCH Superseded Alex Williamson 2 participants 2 messages Jan 15, 2014

v1 of 2 Superseded Latest is v2 →

lore
Share & tools
lore
#0 lore raw

PATCH 1/1 vfio: Filter out bogus mappings

Since 57271d63 we now see spurious mappings with the upper bits set if 64bit PCI BARs are sized while enabled. The guest writes a mask of 0xffffffff to the lower BAR to size it, then restores it, then writes the same mask to the upper BAR resulting in a spurious BAR mapping into the last 4G of the 64bit address space. Most architectures do not support or make use of the full 64bits address space for PCI BARs, so we filter out mappings with the high bit set. Long term, we probably need to think about vfio telling us the address width limitations of the IOMMU.

---
 hw/misc/vfio.c |    4 +++-
 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
hw/misc/vfio.c +3 -1
index 30b1a78..c8f63a6 100644
@@ -2156,7 +2156,9 @@ static int vfio_dma_map(VFIOContainer *container, hwaddr iova,
 
 static bool vfio_listener_skipped_section(MemoryRegionSection *section)
 {
-    return !memory_region_is_ram(section->mr);
+    return !memory_region_is_ram(section->mr) ||
+             section->offset_within_address_space >
+             ~section->offset_within_address_space;
 }
 
 static void vfio_listener_region_add(MemoryListener *listener,
#1 lore raw
Quoted 20 lines · Alex Williamson

Since 57271d63 we now see spurious mappings with the upper bits set if 64bit PCI BARs are sized while enabled. The guest writes a mask of 0xffffffff to the lower BAR to size it, then restores it, then writes the same mask to the upper BAR resulting in a spurious BAR mapping into the last 4G of the 64bit address space. Most architectures do not support or make use of the full 64bits address space for PCI BARs, so we filter out mappings with the high bit set. Long term, we probably need to think about vfio telling us the address width limitations of the IOMMU.

---
 hw/misc/vfio.c |    4 +++-
 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
hw/misc/vfio.c +0 -0
index 30b1a78..c8f63a6 100644

hw/misc/vfio.c static int vfio_dma_map(VFIOContainer *container, hwaddr iova, · line 2161

Quoted 7 lines
hw/misc/vfio.c +3 -1
@@ -2156,7 +2156,9 @@ static int vfio_dma_map(VFIOContainer *container, hwaddr iova,
 
 static bool vfio_listener_skipped_section(MemoryRegionSection *section)
 {
-    return !memory_region_is_ram(section->mr);
+    return !memory_region_is_ram(section->mr) ||
+             section->offset_within_address_space >
+             ~section->offset_within_address_space;

I personally find this a very un-intuitive way to test it.

section->offset_within_address_space >= 0x1ULL << 63

would be more readable I think.

A comment in code explaining what this hack does won't hurt too.

Quoted 3 lines
hw/misc/vfio.c +0 -0
 }
 
 static void vfio_listener_region_add(MemoryListener *listener,