linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 06/13] DMAENGINE: driver for the ARM PL080/PL081 PrimeCells

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: <20101222235403.GE29368@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk>
Date:	Wed, 22 Dec 2010 23:54:03 +0000
From:	Russell King - ARM Linux <linux@....linux.org.uk>
To:	Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@...el.com>
Cc:	Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...ricsson.com>,
	Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@...com>,
	Kukjin Kim <kgene.kim@...sung.com>, yuanyabin1978@...a.com,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Ben Dooks <ben-linux@...ff.org>,
	Peter Pearse <peter.pearse@....com>,
	linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
	Alessandro Rubini <rubini@...pv.it>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 06/13] DMAENGINE: driver for the ARM PL080/PL081
	PrimeCells

On Wed, Dec 22, 2010 at 03:45:39PM -0800, Dan Williams wrote:
> This is listed in the dmaengine documentation [1], but I obviously
> missed this before merging.  This also would have been caught by
> lockdep as required by SubmitChecklist.  As far as corrective action
> before 2.6.37-final.  It looks like this driver needs a full scrub
> which seems unreasonable to complete and test over the holidays before
> .37 lands.  Linus we either need to mark this "depends on BROKEN" or
> revert it.
> 
> Support for the DMA_COMPL flags are necessary if the DMA_MEMCPY
> capability is advertised, yes this driver got this wrong.  I'll update
> the documentation to make this requirement clear, and audit the other
> drivers.  With slave-only drivers the only usage model is one where
> the client driver owns dma-mapping.  In the non-slave (opportunistic
> memcpy offload) case the client is unaware of the engine so the driver
> owns unmapping.  The minimal fix is to disable memcpy offload.
> 
> --
> Dan
> 
> [1]
> 3.6 Constraints:
> 1/ Calls to async_<operation> are not permitted in IRQ context.  Other
>    contexts are permitted provided constraint #2 is not violated.
> 2/ Completion callback routines cannot submit new operations.  This
>    results in recursion in the synchronous case and spin_locks being
>    acquired twice in the asynchronous case.

(2) seems to be more than a little annoying - it seems that DMA engine
drivers use a tasklet for running their DMA cleanup, which calls drivers
callbacks, and we're going to have to have a whole pile of taskets
in drivers just to be triggered from the completion callback.  I can
see this adding an additional layer of complexity and a nice fine set
of shiney new races to deal with.
--
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/