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: <20160318123209.0d5a442a@bbrezillon>
Date:	Fri, 18 Mar 2016 12:32:09 +0100
From:	Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon@...e-electrons.com>
To:	Robin Murphy <robin.murphy@....com>
Cc:	Russell King - ARM Linux <linux@....linux.org.uk>,
	linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
	Herbert Xu <herbert@...dor.apana.org.au>, timur@...eaurora.org,
	Arnaud Ebalard <arno@...isbad.org>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, okaya@...eaurora.org,
	cov@...eaurora.org, "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
	nwatters@...eaurora.org, linux-crypto@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] crypto: marvell/cesa - replace dma_to_phys with
 dma_map_single

On Fri, 18 Mar 2016 11:25:48 +0000
Robin Murphy <robin.murphy@....com> wrote:

> On 18/03/16 09:30, Boris Brezillon wrote:
> > On Thu, 17 Mar 2016 23:50:20 +0000
> > Russell King - ARM Linux <linux@....linux.org.uk> wrote:
> >
> >> On Thu, Mar 17, 2016 at 07:17:24PM -0400, okaya@...eaurora.org wrote:
> >>> What is the correct way? I don't want to write engine->sram_dma = sram
> >>
> >> Well, what the driver _is_ wanting to do is to go from a CPU physical
> >> address to a device DMA address.  phys_to_dma() looks like the correct
> >> thing there to me, but I guess that's just an offset and doesn't take
> >> account of any IOMMU that may be in the way.
> >>
> >> If you have an IOMMU, then the whole phys_to_dma() thing is a total
> >> failure as it only does a linear translation, and there are no
> >> interfaces in the kernel to take account of an IOMMU in the way.  So,
> >> it needs something designed for the job, implemented and discussed by
> >> the normal methods of proposing a new cross-arch interface for drivers
> >> to use.
> >>
> >> What I'm certain of, though, is that the change proposed in this patch
> >> will break current users of this driver: virt_to_page() on an address
> >> returned by ioremap() is completely undefined, and will result in
> >> either a kernel oops, or if not poking at memory which isn't a struct
> >> page, ultimately resulting in something that isn't SRAM being pointed
> >> to by "engine->sram_dma".
> >>
> >
> > Or we could just do
> >
> > 	engine->sram_dma = res->start;
> >
> > which is pretty much what the SRAM/genalloc code is doing already.
> 
> As Russell points out this is yet another type of "set up a DMA master 
> to access something other than kernel RAM" - there's already discussion 
> in progress over how to handle this for dmaengine slaves[1], so 
> gathering more use-cases might help distil exactly what the design of 
> not-strictly-DMA-but-so-closely-coupled-it-can't-really-live-anywhere-else 
> needs to be.
> 
> Robin.
> 
> [1]:http://lists.infradead.org/pipermail/linux-arm-kernel/2016-March/414422.html
> 

Hm, interesting, thanks for the pointer.

-- 
Boris Brezillon, Free Electrons
Embedded Linux and Kernel engineering
http://free-electrons.com

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ