From owner-freebsd-virtualization@freebsd.org Sun May 30 12:38:53 2021 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-virtualization@mailman.nyi.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::19:1]) by mailman.nyi.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id EB23C65486D for ; Sun, 30 May 2021 12:38:53 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org) Received: from mailman.nyi.freebsd.org (unknown [127.0.1.3]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4FtHzK5tpsz4h9N for ; Sun, 30 May 2021 12:38:53 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org) Received: by mailman.nyi.freebsd.org (Postfix) id C8137654D6F; Sun, 30 May 2021 12:38:53 +0000 (UTC) Delivered-To: virtualization@mailman.nyi.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::19:1]) by mailman.nyi.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C6A7F654967 for ; Sun, 30 May 2021 12:38:53 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org) Received: from mxrelay.nyi.freebsd.org (mxrelay.nyi.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::19:3]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) server-digest SHA256 client-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) client-digest SHA256) (Client CN "mxrelay.nyi.freebsd.org", Issuer "R3" (verified OK)) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4FtHzK5385z4hNF for ; Sun, 30 May 2021 12:38:53 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org) Received: from kenobi.freebsd.org (kenobi.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::50:1d]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) server-digest SHA256) (Client did not present a certificate) by mxrelay.nyi.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 92D0D1D3B5 for ; Sun, 30 May 2021 12:38:53 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org) Received: from kenobi.freebsd.org ([127.0.1.5]) by kenobi.freebsd.org (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTP id 14UCcrsu078422 for ; Sun, 30 May 2021 12:38:53 GMT (envelope-from bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org) Received: (from www@localhost) by kenobi.freebsd.org (8.15.2/8.15.2/Submit) id 14UCcrfa078421 for virtualization@FreeBSD.org; Sun, 30 May 2021 12:38:53 GMT (envelope-from bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org) X-Authentication-Warning: kenobi.freebsd.org: www set sender to bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org using -f From: bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org To: virtualization@FreeBSD.org Subject: [Bug 251046] bhyve PCI passthrough does not work inside jail Date: Sun, 30 May 2021 12:38:53 +0000 X-Bugzilla-Reason: AssignedTo X-Bugzilla-Type: changed X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None X-Bugzilla-Product: Base System X-Bugzilla-Component: kern X-Bugzilla-Version: 12.2-RELEASE X-Bugzilla-Keywords: X-Bugzilla-Severity: Affects Many People X-Bugzilla-Who: me@anatoli.ws X-Bugzilla-Status: Open X-Bugzilla-Resolution: X-Bugzilla-Priority: --- X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: virtualization@FreeBSD.org X-Bugzilla-Flags: X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: cc Message-ID: In-Reply-To: References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Bugzilla-URL: https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/ Auto-Submitted: auto-generated MIME-Version: 1.0 X-BeenThere: freebsd-virtualization@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.34 Precedence: list List-Id: "Discussion of various virtualization techniques FreeBSD supports." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 30 May 2021 12:38:54 -0000 https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3D251046 Anatoli changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |me@anatoli.ws --- Comment #7 from Anatoli --- Hi All, > Even then I'm not sure why it's useful to jail the bhyve process - what d= oes it buy you? The idea to run bhyve inside jail is to provide an additional layer of secu= rity for potential vm-escape vulnerabilities in bhyve. This is the way VMs are executed on Linux (protected by AppArmor and SEL) a= nd Illumos. Currently it's possible to run bhyve in jail, but not with PCI passthrough. > A better solution would be to extend pci(4) so that bhyve can use it to d= o everything required for PCI passthrough. Mark, could you please give us a hint on what should be done to extend pci(= 4) so jail changes are not needed? We are willing to implement this, but need = some guidance. One more security improvement that bhyve needs is to run it without root, b= ut that's another story for another report. --=20 You are receiving this mail because: You are the assignee for the bug.=