[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <7b9f8b6d-60f2-0a78-b582-0821401d17eb@amd.com>
Date: Wed, 21 Jun 2017 10:37:41 -0500
From: Tom Lendacky <thomas.lendacky@....com>
To: Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>
Cc: linux-arch@...r.kernel.org, linux-efi@...r.kernel.org,
kvm@...r.kernel.org, linux-doc@...r.kernel.org, x86@...nel.org,
kexec@...ts.infradead.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
kasan-dev@...glegroups.com, xen-devel@...ts.xen.org,
linux-mm@...ck.org, iommu@...ts.linux-foundation.org,
Brijesh Singh <brijesh.singh@....com>,
Toshimitsu Kani <toshi.kani@....com>,
Radim Krčmář <rkrcmar@...hat.com>,
Matt Fleming <matt@...eblueprint.co.uk>,
Alexander Potapenko <glider@...gle.com>,
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
Larry Woodman <lwoodman@...hat.com>,
Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net>,
Joerg Roedel <joro@...tes.org>,
"Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@...hat.com>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
Andrey Ryabinin <aryabinin@...tuozzo.com>,
Dave Young <dyoung@...hat.com>, Rik van Riel <riel@...hat.com>,
Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>,
Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk <konrad.wilk@...cle.com>,
Andy Lutomirski <luto@...nel.org>,
Boris Ostrovsky <boris.ostrovsky@...cle.com>,
Dmitry Vyukov <dvyukov@...gle.com>,
Juergen Gross <jgross@...e.com>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v7 25/36] swiotlb: Add warnings for use of bounce buffers
with SME
On 6/21/2017 5:50 AM, Borislav Petkov wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 16, 2017 at 01:54:36PM -0500, Tom Lendacky wrote:
>> Add warnings to let the user know when bounce buffers are being used for
>> DMA when SME is active. Since the bounce buffers are not in encrypted
>> memory, these notifications are to allow the user to determine some
>> appropriate action - if necessary. Actions can range from utilizing an
>> IOMMU, replacing the device with another device that can support 64-bit
>> DMA, ignoring the message if the device isn't used much, etc.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Tom Lendacky <thomas.lendacky@....com>
>> ---
>> include/linux/dma-mapping.h | 11 +++++++++++
>> include/linux/mem_encrypt.h | 8 ++++++++
>> lib/swiotlb.c | 3 +++
>> 3 files changed, 22 insertions(+)
>>
>> diff --git a/include/linux/dma-mapping.h b/include/linux/dma-mapping.h
>> index 4f3eece..ee2307e 100644
>> --- a/include/linux/dma-mapping.h
>> +++ b/include/linux/dma-mapping.h
>> @@ -10,6 +10,7 @@
>> #include <linux/scatterlist.h>
>> #include <linux/kmemcheck.h>
>> #include <linux/bug.h>
>> +#include <linux/mem_encrypt.h>
>>
>> /**
>> * List of possible attributes associated with a DMA mapping. The semantics
>> @@ -577,6 +578,11 @@ static inline int dma_set_mask(struct device *dev, u64 mask)
>>
>> if (!dev->dma_mask || !dma_supported(dev, mask))
>> return -EIO;
>> +
>> + /* Since mask is unsigned, this can only be true if SME is active */
>> + if (mask < sme_dma_mask())
>> + dev_warn(dev, "SME is active, device will require DMA bounce buffers\n");
>> +
>> *dev->dma_mask = mask;
>> return 0;
>> }
>> @@ -596,6 +602,11 @@ static inline int dma_set_coherent_mask(struct device *dev, u64 mask)
>> {
>> if (!dma_supported(dev, mask))
>> return -EIO;
>> +
>> + /* Since mask is unsigned, this can only be true if SME is active */
>> + if (mask < sme_dma_mask())
>> + dev_warn(dev, "SME is active, device will require DMA bounce buffers\n");
>
> Looks to me like those two checks above need to be a:
>
> void sme_check_mask(struct device *dev, u64 mask)
> {
> if (!sme_me_mask)
> return;
>
> /* Since mask is unsigned, this can only be true if SME is active */
> if (mask < (((u64)sme_me_mask << 1) - 1))
> dev_warn(dev, "SME is active, device will require DMA bounce buffers\n");
> }
>
> which gets called and sme_dma_mask() is not really needed.
Makes a lot of sense, I'll update the patch.
Thanks,
Tom
>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists