linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] x86: define arch_vm_get_page_prot to set _PAGE_IOMAP on VM

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: <4CC1BF58.9020001@zytor.com>
Date:	Fri, 22 Oct 2010 09:44:08 -0700
From:	"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>
To:	Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk <konrad.wilk@...cle.com>
CC:	Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy@...p.org>,
	the arch/x86 maintainers <x86@...nel.org>,
	"Xen-devel@...ts.xensource.com" <Xen-devel@...ts.xensource.com>,
	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] x86: define arch_vm_get_page_prot to set _PAGE_IOMAP
 on VM_IO vmas

On 10/22/2010 08:08 AM, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk wrote:
>>
>> Okay, could you clarify this part a bit?  Why does the kernel need to
>> know the difference between "pseudo-physical" and "machine addresses" at
>> all?  If they overlap, there is a problem, and if they don't overlap, it
>> will be a 1:1 mapping anyway...
> 
> The flag (_PAGE_IOMAP) is used when we set the PTE so that the MFN value is
> used instead of the PFN. We need that b/c when a driver does page_to_pfn()
> it ends up using the PFN as bus address to write out registers data.
> 
> Without this patch, the page->virt->PFN value is used and the PFN != to real MFN
> so we end up writing in a memory address that the PCI device has no idea about.
> By setting the PTE with the MFN, the virt->PFN gets the real MFN value.
> 
> The drivers I am talking about are mostly, if not all, located in drivers/gpu
> and it looks that we are missing two more patches to utilize the patch
> that Jeremy posted.
> 
> Please note that I am _not_ suggesting that the two patches
> below should go out - I still need to post them on drm mailing list.
> 

I'm still seriously confused.  If I understand this correctly, we're
talking about DMA addresses here (as opposed to PIO addresses, i.e.
BARs), right?

It's the bimodality that really bothers me.  I understand of course that
Xen imposes yet another address remapping layer, but I'm having a hard
time understanding any conditions under with we would need that layer to
go away, as long as DMA addresses are translated via the DMA APIs -- and
if they aren't, then iommus will break, too.

As such, I don't grok this page flag and what it does, and why it's
needed.  I'm not saying it's *wrong*, I'm saying the design is opaque to
me and I'm not sure it is the right solution.

	-hpa

-- 
H. Peter Anvin, Intel Open Source Technology Center
I work for Intel.  I don't speak on their behalf.

--
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/