linux-kernel - Re: [RFC 1/2] virtio_console: Add support for DMA memory allocation

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]

Date:	Tue, 4 Sep 2012 18:58:47 +0200
From:	Sjur Brændeland <sjurbren@...il.com>
To:	"Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@...hat.com>
Cc:	Amit Shah <amit.shah@...hat.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	Rusty Russell <rusty@...tcorp.com.au>,
	Ohad Ben-Cohen <ohad@...ery.com>,
	Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org>,
	virtualization@...ts.linux-foundation.org
Subject: Re: [RFC 1/2] virtio_console: Add support for DMA memory allocation

Hi Michael,

> Exactly. Though if we just fail load it will be much less code.
>
> Generally, using a feature bit for this is a bit of a problem though:
> normally driver is expected to be able to simply ignore
> a feature bit. In this case driver is required to
> do something so a feature bit is not a good fit.
> I am not sure what the right thing to do is.

I see - so in order to avoid the binding between driver and device
there are two options I guess. Either make virtio_dev_match() or
virtcons_probe() fail. Neither of them seems like the obvious choice.

Maybe adding a check for VIRTIO_CONSOLE_F_DMA_MEM match
between device and driver in virtcons_probe() is the lesser evil?

Regards,
Sjur
--
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/