Re: [PATCH 1/3] intel-iommu: don't warn guest errors when getting rid2pasid entry

[Jason Wang]

On Thu, Jan 13, 2022 at 11:35 AM Peter Xu <peterx@redhat.com> wrote:
>
> On Wed, Jan 05, 2022 at 12:19:43PM +0800, Jason Wang wrote:
> > We use to warn on wrong rid2pasid entry. But this error could be
> > triggered by the guest and could happens during initialization. So
> > let's don't warn in this case.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Jason Wang <jasowang@redhat.com>
> > ---
> >  hw/i386/intel_iommu.c | 6 ++++--
> >  1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/hw/i386/intel_iommu.c b/hw/i386/intel_iommu.c
> > index 4c6c016388..f2c7a23712 100644
> > --- a/hw/i386/intel_iommu.c
> > +++ b/hw/i386/intel_iommu.c
> > @@ -1524,8 +1524,10 @@ static bool vtd_dev_pt_enabled(IntelIOMMUState *s, 
> > VTDContextEntry *ce)
> >      if (s->root_scalable) {
> >          ret = vtd_ce_get_rid2pasid_entry(s, ce, &pe);
> >          if (ret) {
> > -            error_report_once("%s: vtd_ce_get_rid2pasid_entry error: 
> > %"PRId32,
> > -                              __func__, ret);
> > +            /*
> > +             * This error is guest triggerable. We should assumt PT
> > +             * not enabled for safety.
> > +             */
> >              return false;
> >          }
> >          return (VTD_PE_GET_TYPE(&pe) == VTD_SM_PASID_ENTRY_PT);
> > --
> > 2.25.1
> >
>
> No strong opinion, but the thing is mostly all error_report_once() in this 
> file
> is guest triggerable.  If we remove this one then it's debatable on whether we
> want to remove all.
>
> IMHO we used the _once() variant just for this: it won't go into any form of
> DoS, meanwhile we'll still get some information (as hypervisor) that the guest
> OS may not be trustworthy.
>
> So from that pov it's still useful?  Or is this error very special in some 
> way?

I want to be consistent with vtd_as_pt_enabled() where we don't even
have error_report_once().

Thanks

>
> Thanks,
>
> --
> Peter Xu
>