| 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
| ||
|
Date: Fri, 22 May 2009 20:13:13 +0900
From: FUJITA Tomonori <fujita.tomonori@....ntt.co.jp>
To: ian.campbell@...rix.com
Cc: fujita.tomonori@....ntt.co.jp, jeremy@...p.org,
beckyb@...nel.crashing.org, okir@...e.de, mingo@...e.hu,
gregkh@...e.de, xendevel@...ts.xensource.com, x86@...nel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] swiotlb: make range_needs_mapping architecture-specific
On Thu, 21 May 2009 17:15:23 +0100
Ian Campbell <ian.campbell@...rix.com> wrote:
> This moves range_needs_mapping() from lib/swiotlb.c to
> arch/*/include/asm/dma-mapping.h and renames it
> swiotlb_arch_force_mapping() to more acurately reflect its usage.
>
> Signed-off-by: Ian Campbell <ian.campbell@...rix.com>
> Cc: FUJITA Tomonori <fujita.tomonori@....ntt.co.jp>
> Cc: Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy@...p.org>
> Cc: Becky Bruce <beckyb@...nel.crashing.org>
> Cc: Olaf Kirch <okir@...e.de>
> Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
> Cc: Greg KH <gregkh@...e.de>
> Cc: xen-devel <xendevel@...ts.xensource.com>
> Cc: x86 maintainers <x86@...nel.org>
> Cc: lkml <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
> ---
> arch/ia64/include/asm/dma-mapping.h | 5 +++++
> arch/powerpc/include/asm/dma-mapping.h | 5 +++++
> arch/x86/include/asm/dma-mapping.h | 9 +++++++++
> arch/x86/kernel/pci-swiotlb.c | 2 ++
> include/linux/swiotlb.h | 2 --
> lib/swiotlb.c | 13 ++++---------
> 6 files changed, 25 insertions(+), 11 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/arch/ia64/include/asm/dma-mapping.h b/arch/ia64/include/asm/dma-mapping.h
> index a091648..3e8fb31 100644
> --- a/arch/ia64/include/asm/dma-mapping.h
> +++ b/arch/ia64/include/asm/dma-mapping.h
> @@ -180,4 +180,9 @@ static inline int is_buffer_dma_capable(struct device *dev, u64 mask,
> return addr + size <= mask;
> }
>
> +static inline int swiotlb_force_mapping(phys_addr_t paddr, size_t size)
> +{
> + return 0;
> +}
> +
> #endif /* _ASM_IA64_DMA_MAPPING_H */
> diff --git a/arch/powerpc/include/asm/dma-mapping.h b/arch/powerpc/include/asm/dma-mapping.h
> index c69f2b5..7e3510d 100644
> --- a/arch/powerpc/include/asm/dma-mapping.h
> +++ b/arch/powerpc/include/asm/dma-mapping.h
> @@ -429,5 +429,10 @@ static inline void dma_cache_sync(struct device *dev, void *vaddr, size_t size,
> __dma_sync(vaddr, size, (int)direction);
> }
>
> +static inline int swiotlb_force_mapping(phys_addr_t paddr, size_t size)
> +{
> + return 0;
> +}
> +
Adding a swiotlb specific function to asm/dma-mapping.h is wrong.
> #endif /* __KERNEL__ */
> #endif /* _ASM_DMA_MAPPING_H */
> diff --git a/arch/x86/include/asm/dma-mapping.h b/arch/x86/include/asm/dma-mapping.h
> index 52b8d36..aa9639f 100644
> --- a/arch/x86/include/asm/dma-mapping.h
> +++ b/arch/x86/include/asm/dma-mapping.h
> @@ -315,4 +315,13 @@ static inline int is_buffer_dma_capable(struct device *dev, u64 mask,
> return addr + size <= mask;
> }
>
> +extern int (*x86_swiotlb_force_mapping)(phys_addr_t paddr, size_t size);
> +
> +static inline int swiotlb_force_mapping(phys_addr_t paddr, size_t size)
> +{
> + if (x86_swiotlb_force_mapping)
> + return x86_swiotlb_force_mapping(paddr, size);
> + return 0;
> +}
> +
> #endif
> diff --git a/arch/x86/kernel/pci-swiotlb.c b/arch/x86/kernel/pci-swiotlb.c
> index 7267376..d48912c 100644
> --- a/arch/x86/kernel/pci-swiotlb.c
> +++ b/arch/x86/kernel/pci-swiotlb.c
> @@ -15,6 +15,8 @@
>
> int swiotlb __read_mostly;
>
> +int (*x86_swiotlb_force_mapping)(phys_addr_t paddr, size_t size);
> +
> static void *x86_swiotlb_alloc_coherent(struct device *hwdev, size_t size,
> dma_addr_t *dma_handle, gfp_t flags)
> {
> diff --git a/include/linux/swiotlb.h b/include/linux/swiotlb.h
> index cb1a663..32f4fa4 100644
> --- a/include/linux/swiotlb.h
> +++ b/include/linux/swiotlb.h
> @@ -32,8 +32,6 @@ extern dma_addr_t swiotlb_phys_to_bus(struct device *hwdev,
> extern phys_addr_t swiotlb_bus_to_phys(struct device *hwdev,
> dma_addr_t address);
Ditto.
And using a function pointer for the architecture abstraction is worse
than __weak.
> -extern int swiotlb_arch_range_needs_mapping(phys_addr_t paddr, size_t size);
> -
> extern void
> *swiotlb_alloc_coherent(struct device *hwdev, size_t size,
> dma_addr_t *dma_handle, gfp_t flags);
> diff --git a/lib/swiotlb.c b/lib/swiotlb.c
> index 98726a2..d311654 100644
> --- a/lib/swiotlb.c
> +++ b/lib/swiotlb.c
> @@ -147,11 +147,6 @@ void * __weak swiotlb_bus_to_virt(struct device *hwdev, dma_addr_t address)
> return phys_to_virt(swiotlb_bus_to_phys(hwdev, address));
> }
>
> -int __weak swiotlb_arch_range_needs_mapping(phys_addr_t paddr, size_t size)
> -{
> - return 0;
> -}
> -
> static void swiotlb_print_info(unsigned long bytes)
> {
> phys_addr_t pstart, pend;
> @@ -312,9 +307,9 @@ cleanup1:
> return -ENOMEM;
> }
>
> -static inline int range_needs_mapping(phys_addr_t paddr, size_t size)
> +static inline int force_mapping(phys_addr_t paddr, size_t size)
> {
> - return swiotlb_force || swiotlb_arch_range_needs_mapping(paddr, size);
> + return swiotlb_force || swiotlb_force_mapping(paddr, size);
> }
>
> static int is_swiotlb_buffer(char *addr)
> @@ -647,7 +642,7 @@ dma_addr_t swiotlb_map_page(struct device *dev, struct page *page,
> * buffering it.
> */
> if (is_buffer_dma_capable(dev, dma_get_mask(dev), dev_addr, size) &&
> - !range_needs_mapping(phys, size))
> + !force_mapping(phys, size))
> return dev_addr;
>
> /*
> @@ -810,7 +805,7 @@ swiotlb_map_sg_attrs(struct device *hwdev, struct scatterlist *sgl, int nelems,
> phys_addr_t paddr = sg_phys(sg);
> dma_addr_t dev_addr = swiotlb_phys_to_bus(hwdev, paddr);
>
> - if (range_needs_mapping(paddr, sg->length) ||
> + if (force_mapping(paddr, sg->length) ||
> !is_buffer_dma_capable(hwdev, dma_get_mask(hwdev),
> dev_addr, sg->length)) {
> void *map = map_single(hwdev, sg_phys(sg),
> --
> 1.5.6.5
>
> --
> 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/
--
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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists