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
| ||
|
Message-Id: <201407222006.44666.arnd@arndb.de> Date: Tue, 22 Jul 2014 20:06:44 +0200 From: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de> To: linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org Cc: Laura Abbott <lauraa@...eaurora.org>, Will Deacon <will.deacon@....com>, Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@....com>, David Riley <davidriley@...omium.org>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-mm@...ck.org, Ritesh Harjain <ritesh.harjani@...il.com> Subject: Re: [PATCHv4 5/5] arm64: Add atomic pool for non-coherent and CMA allocations. On Wednesday 02 July 2014, Laura Abbott wrote: > + pgprot_t prot = __pgprot(PROT_NORMAL_NC); > + unsigned long nr_pages = atomic_pool_size >> PAGE_SHIFT; > + struct page *page; > + void *addr; > + > + > + if (dev_get_cma_area(NULL)) > + page = dma_alloc_from_contiguous(NULL, nr_pages, > + get_order(atomic_pool_size)); > + else > + page = alloc_pages(GFP_KERNEL, get_order(atomic_pool_size)); > + > + > + if (page) { > + int ret; > + > + atomic_pool = gen_pool_create(PAGE_SHIFT, -1); > + if (!atomic_pool) > + goto free_page; > + > + addr = dma_common_contiguous_remap(page, atomic_pool_size, > + VM_USERMAP, prot, atomic_pool_init); > + I just stumbled over this thread and noticed the code here: When you do alloc_pages() above, you actually get pages that are already mapped into the linear kernel mapping as cacheable pages. Your new dma_common_contiguous_remap tries to map them as noncacheable. This seems broken because it allows the CPU to treat both mappings as cacheable, and that won't be coherent with device DMA. > + if (!addr) > + goto destroy_genpool; > + > + memset(addr, 0, atomic_pool_size); > + __dma_flush_range(addr, addr + atomic_pool_size); It also seems weird to flush the cache on a virtual address of an uncacheable mapping. Is that well-defined? In the CMA case, the original mapping should already be uncached here, so you don't need to flush it. In the alloc_pages() case, I think you need to unmap the pages from the linear mapping instead. Arnd -- 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