You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
Hi,
I'm considering setting option NVreg_RegistryDwords="PeerMappingOverride=1;" on nvidia.ko, as suggested by NVSHMEM for IBGDA support (GPU Direct Async). This is currently disabled by default, but accessible for root.
Browsing the source code for information I noticed several worrying lines :)
For example, in src/nvidia/arch/nvalloc/unix/src/osmemdesc.c:
452 if (FLD_TEST_DRF(OS02, _FLAGS, _PEER_MAP_OVERRIDE, _REQUIRED, flags))
453 {
454 //
455 // Don't allow MMIO mappings for unprivileged users
456 // This is a temporary WAR for bug 1630288 "[PeerSync] threat related
457 // to GPU"
458 //
459 KernelBif *pKernelBif = GPU_GET_KERNEL_BIF(pGpu);
460 if (!pKernelBif->peerMappingOverride && !osIsAdministrator())
461 {
462 NV_PRINTF(LEVEL_ERROR,
463 "%s(): permission denied, allowPeermapping=%d\n",
464 __FUNCTION__, pKernelBif->peerMappingOverride);
465 return NV_ERR_INSUFFICIENT_PERMISSIONS;
466 }
467 }
I cannot find information on Bug 1630288 online. But it seems the work around is to restrict the option, which is a little worrying.
My question is what are the details for this bug? Specifically, what are the implications, risk surface, etc.
reacted with thumbs up emoji reacted with thumbs down emoji reacted with laugh emoji reacted with hooray emoji reacted with confused emoji reacted with heart emoji reacted with rocket emoji reacted with eyes emoji
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
-
Hi,
I'm considering setting option
NVreg_RegistryDwords="PeerMappingOverride=1;"onnvidia.ko, as suggested by NVSHMEM for IBGDA support (GPU Direct Async). This is currently disabled by default, but accessible for root.Browsing the source code for information I noticed several worrying lines :)
For example, in
src/nvidia/arch/nvalloc/unix/src/osmemdesc.c:I cannot find information on Bug 1630288 online. But it seems the work around is to restrict the option, which is a little worrying.
My question is what are the details for this bug? Specifically, what are the implications, risk surface, etc.
Thank you for any information!
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
All reactions