linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 9/9] x86: Detect whether we should use Xen SWIOTLB.

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

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

Date:	Wed, 28 Jul 2010 15:52:50 -0700
From:	"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>
To:	Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk <konrad.wilk@...cle.com>
CC:	FUJITA Tomonori <fujita.tomonori@....ntt.co.jp>, jeremy@...p.org,
	Ian.Campbell@...rix.com, albert_herranz@...oo.es, x86@...nel.org,
	jbarnes@...tuousgeek.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	iommu@...ts.linux-foundation.org, tglx@...utronix.de
Subject: Re: [PATCH 9/9] x86: Detect whether we should use Xen SWIOTLB.

On 07/28/2010 03:38 PM, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk wrote:
> 
> Long term I think the driverization is the way to go, and..
> 
> I think the flow a). check if we need SWIOTLB b), check all IOMMUs, c).
> recheck SWIOTLB in case no IOMMUs volunteered MUST be preserved
> irregardless if we driverize the IOMMUs/SWIOTLB or not.
> 
> Perhaps we should get together at one of these Linux conferences and
> think this one through? Beers on me.
> 

I don't understand point (a) here.  (c) simply seems like the fallback
case, and in the case we are actively forcing swiotlb we simply skip
step (b).

	-hpa
--
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/