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  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:	Mon, 16 Jun 2014 14:24:50 +0900
From:	Joonsoo Kim <iamjoonsoo.kim@....com>
To:	Minchan Kim <minchan@...nel.org>
Cc:	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	"Aneesh Kumar K.V" <aneesh.kumar@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
	Marek Szyprowski <m.szyprowski@...sung.com>,
	Michal Nazarewicz <mina86@...a86.com>,
	Russell King - ARM Linux <linux@....linux.org.uk>,
	kvm@...r.kernel.org, linux-mm@...ck.org,
	Gleb Natapov <gleb@...nel.org>,
	Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
	Alexander Graf <agraf@...e.de>, kvm-ppc@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Paul Mackerras <paulus@...ba.org>,
	Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@...nel.crashing.org>,
	Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@...hat.com>,
	linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org, linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 03/10] DMA, CMA: separate core cma management codes
 from DMA APIs

On Thu, Jun 12, 2014 at 02:37:43PM +0900, Minchan Kim wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 12, 2014 at 12:21:40PM +0900, Joonsoo Kim wrote:
> > To prepare future generalization work on cma area management code,
> > we need to separate core cma management codes from DMA APIs.
> > We will extend these core functions to cover requirements of
> > ppc kvm's cma area management functionality in following patches.
> > This separation helps us not to touch DMA APIs while extending
> > core functions.
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Joonsoo Kim <iamjoonsoo.kim@....com>
> > 
> > diff --git a/drivers/base/dma-contiguous.c b/drivers/base/dma-contiguous.c
> > index fb0cdce..8a44c82 100644
> > --- a/drivers/base/dma-contiguous.c
> > +++ b/drivers/base/dma-contiguous.c
> > @@ -231,9 +231,9 @@ core_initcall(cma_init_reserved_areas);
> >   * If @fixed is true, reserve contiguous area at exactly @base.  If false,
> >   * reserve in range from @base to @limit.
> >   */
> > -int __init dma_contiguous_reserve_area(phys_addr_t size, phys_addr_t base,
> > -				       phys_addr_t limit, struct cma **res_cma,
> > -				       bool fixed)
> > +static int __init __dma_contiguous_reserve_area(phys_addr_t size,
> > +				phys_addr_t base, phys_addr_t limit,
> > +				struct cma **res_cma, bool fixed)
> >  {
> >  	struct cma *cma = &cma_areas[cma_area_count];
> >  	phys_addr_t alignment;
> > @@ -288,16 +288,30 @@ int __init dma_contiguous_reserve_area(phys_addr_t size, phys_addr_t base,
> >  
> >  	pr_info("%s(): reserved %ld MiB at %08lx\n",
> >  		__func__, (unsigned long)size / SZ_1M, (unsigned long)base);
> > -
> > -	/* Architecture specific contiguous memory fixup. */
> > -	dma_contiguous_early_fixup(base, size);
> >  	return 0;
> > +
> >  err:
> >  	pr_err("%s(): failed to reserve %ld MiB\n",
> >  		__func__, (unsigned long)size / SZ_1M);
> >  	return ret;
> >  }
> >  
> > +int __init dma_contiguous_reserve_area(phys_addr_t size, phys_addr_t base,
> > +				       phys_addr_t limit, struct cma **res_cma,
> > +				       bool fixed)
> > +{
> > +	int ret;
> > +
> > +	ret = __dma_contiguous_reserve_area(size, base, limit, res_cma, fixed);
> > +	if (ret)
> > +		return ret;
> > +
> > +	/* Architecture specific contiguous memory fixup. */
> > +	dma_contiguous_early_fixup(base, size);
> 
> In old, base and size are aligned with alignment and passed into arch fixup
> but your patch is changing it.
> I didn't look at what kinds of side effect it makes but just want to confirm.

Good catch!!!
I will fix it.

> > +
> > +	return 0;
> > +}
> > +
> >  static void clear_cma_bitmap(struct cma *cma, unsigned long pfn, int count)
> >  {
> >  	mutex_lock(&cma->lock);
> > @@ -316,20 +330,16 @@ static void clear_cma_bitmap(struct cma *cma, unsigned long pfn, int count)
> >   * global one. Requires architecture specific dev_get_cma_area() helper
> >   * function.
> >   */
> > -struct page *dma_alloc_from_contiguous(struct device *dev, int count,
> > +static struct page *__dma_alloc_from_contiguous(struct cma *cma, int count,
> >  				       unsigned int align)
> >  {
> >  	unsigned long mask, pfn, pageno, start = 0;
> > -	struct cma *cma = dev_get_cma_area(dev);
> >  	struct page *page = NULL;
> >  	int ret;
> >  
> >  	if (!cma || !cma->count)
> >  		return NULL;
> >  
> > -	if (align > CONFIG_CMA_ALIGNMENT)
> > -		align = CONFIG_CMA_ALIGNMENT;
> > -
> >  	pr_debug("%s(cma %p, count %d, align %d)\n", __func__, (void *)cma,
> >  		 count, align);
> >  
> > @@ -377,6 +387,17 @@ struct page *dma_alloc_from_contiguous(struct device *dev, int count,
> >  	return page;
> >  }
> >  
> 
> Please move the description in __dma_alloc_from_contiguous to here exported API.
> 

Okay.

> > +struct page *dma_alloc_from_contiguous(struct device *dev, int count,
> > +				       unsigned int align)
> > +{
> > +	struct cma *cma = dev_get_cma_area(dev);
> > +
> > +	if (align > CONFIG_CMA_ALIGNMENT)
> > +		align = CONFIG_CMA_ALIGNMENT;
> > +
> > +	return __dma_alloc_from_contiguous(cma, count, align);
> > +}
> > +
> >  /**
> >   * dma_release_from_contiguous() - release allocated pages
> >   * @dev:   Pointer to device for which the pages were allocated.
> > @@ -387,10 +408,9 @@ struct page *dma_alloc_from_contiguous(struct device *dev, int count,
> >   * It returns false when provided pages do not belong to contiguous area and
> >   * true otherwise.
> >   */
> > -bool dma_release_from_contiguous(struct device *dev, struct page *pages,
> > +static bool __dma_release_from_contiguous(struct cma *cma, struct page *pages,
> >  				 int count)
> >  {
> > -	struct cma *cma = dev_get_cma_area(dev);
> >  	unsigned long pfn;
> >  
> >  	if (!cma || !pages)
> > @@ -410,3 +430,11 @@ bool dma_release_from_contiguous(struct device *dev, struct page *pages,
> >  
> >  	return true;
> >  }
> > +
> 
> Ditto.
> 
Okay.

Thanks.
--
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