Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Complete mitigation section #112

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
May 5, 2024
Merged

Complete mitigation section #112

merged 1 commit into from
May 5, 2024

Conversation

jyao1
Copy link
Collaborator

@jyao1 jyao1 commented Apr 26, 2024

Fix #16

@sameo sameo added the v0.2.0 label Apr 28, 2024
specification/05-security_model.adoc Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
Comment on lines 445 to 446
- The TVM must accept the DMA translation table explictely.
- The TSM must not enable DMA translation table until the TVM accepts it.
Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I don't think the TVM should or can accept the DMA translation tables.

Suggested change
- The TVM must accept the DMA translation table explictely.
- The TSM must not enable DMA translation table until the TVM accepts it.
- The RDSM must guarantee that a DMA transaction from one TDI is translated by an IOMMU instance controlled by a TSM that manages the TVM to which the TDI is bound to.
- The TSM must guarantee that the DMA translation table for a TDI under its control is consistent with the G-stage tables for the TVM the TDI is bound to.
- The TSM must not enable DMA translation table until the TVM accepts the TDI.

Copy link
Collaborator Author

@jyao1 jyao1 Apr 30, 2024

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Updated. Thanks for the feedback.

I don't think the TVM should or can accept the DMA translation tables.

For GPA->HPA, right, TVM cannot do anything.
But if DMA translation table also has GVA->GPA, then TVM needs to provide input.

Signed-off-by: Jiewen Yao <jiewen.yao@intel.com>
@sameo sameo merged commit 04d39b3 into riscv-non-isa:main May 5, 2024
2 checks passed
@jyao1 jyao1 deleted the mitigation branch October 8, 2024 09:00
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

Follow-up PR #15: Complete mitigations sections
2 participants