linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 5/7] swiotlb: (re)Create swiotlb_unmap

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-Id: <20090407180928Y.fujita.tomonori@lab.ntt.co.jp>
Date:	Tue, 7 Apr 2009 18:09:50 +0900
From:	FUJITA Tomonori <fujita.tomonori@....ntt.co.jp>
To:	galak@...nel.crashing.org
Cc:	fujita.tomonori@....ntt.co.jp, beckyb@...nel.crashing.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, mingo@...e.hu, jeremy@...p.org,
	ian.campbell@...rix.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 5/7] swiotlb: (re)Create swiotlb_unmap_single

On Tue, 7 Apr 2009 01:34:44 -0500
Kumar Gala <galak@...nel.crashing.org> wrote:

> 
> On Apr 6, 2009, at 9:24 PM, FUJITA Tomonori wrote:
> 
> > On Fri,  3 Apr 2009 20:56:47 -0500
> > Becky Bruce <beckyb@...nel.crashing.org> wrote:
> >
> >> This mirrors the current swiotlb_sync_single() setup
> >> where the swiotlb_unmap_single() function is static to this
> >> file and contains the logic required to determine if we need
> >> to call actual sync_single.  Previously, swiotlb_unmap_page
> >> and swiotlb_unmap_sg were duplicating very similar code.
> >> The duplicated code has also been reformatted for
> >> readability.
> >>
> >> Note that the swiotlb_unmap_sg code was previously doing
> >> a complicated comparison to determine if an addresses needed
> >> to be unmapped where a simple is_swiotlb_buffer() call
> >> would have sufficed.
> >>
> >> Signed-off-by: Becky Bruce <beckyb@...nel.crashing.org>
> >> ---
> >> lib/swiotlb.c |   36 +++++++++++++++++++++++-------------
> >> 1 files changed, 23 insertions(+), 13 deletions(-)
> >>
> >> diff --git a/lib/swiotlb.c b/lib/swiotlb.c
> >> index af2ec25..602315b 100644
> >> --- a/lib/swiotlb.c
> >> +++ b/lib/swiotlb.c
> >
> > I don't think 'swiotlb_unmap_single' name is appropriate.
> >
> > swiotlb_unmap_single sounds like an exported function that IOMMUs can
> > use (and it was) however it should not be.
> 
> What do you suggest we call it?  __swiotlb_unmap_single.

I think that __swiotlb_unmap_single is better because the name implies
that it's an internal function. It's fine by me.

If it is odd that __swiotlb_unmap_single() is just a wrapper function
of unmap_single(), which does the real job to unmap a dma mapping, it
might be another possible option to rename unmap_single to
do_unamp_single and use unmap_single.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/