linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] iommu/vt-d: Fix scatterlist offset handling

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: <20171117091814.6673aecf@t450s.home>
Date:   Fri, 17 Nov 2017 09:18:14 -0700
From:   Alex Williamson <alex.williamson@...hat.com>
To:     "Raj, Ashok" <ashok.raj@...el.com>
Cc:     Jacob Pan <jacob.jun.pan@...ux.intel.com>, leedom@...lsio.com,
        herbert@...dor.apana.org.au, David Woodhouse <dwmw2@...radead.org>,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, iommu@...ts.linux-foundation.org,
        linux-crypto@...r.kernel.org, Harsh@...lsio.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] iommu/vt-d: Fix scatterlist offset handling

On Thu, 16 Nov 2017 13:09:33 -0800
"Raj, Ashok" <ashok.raj@...el.com> wrote:

> Hi Alex
> 
> On Thu, Nov 16, 2017 at 02:32:44PM -0700, Alex Williamson wrote:
> > On Wed, 15 Nov 2017 15:54:56 -0800
> > Jacob Pan <jacob.jun.pan@...ux.intel.com> wrote:
> >   
> > > Hi Alex and all,
> > > 
> > > Just wondering if you could merge Robin's patch for the next rc. From
> > > all our testing, this seems to be a solid fix and should be included in
> > > the stable releases as well.  
> > 
> > Hi Jacob,
> > 
> > Sorry, this wasn't on my radar, I only scanned for patches back through
> > about when Joerg refreshed his next branch (others on the list speak up
> > if I didn't pickup your patches for the v4.15 merge window).
> > 
> > This patch makes sense to me and I'm glad you were able to work through
> > the anomaly Harsh saw in testing as an unrelated issue, but...
> > 
> > 
> > What do we do about this?  I certainly can't rip out large page support
> > and put a stable tag on the patch.  I'm not really spotting what's
> > wrong with large page support here, other than the comment about it
> > being a mess.  Suggestions?  Thanks,
> >   
> 
> Largepage seems to work and i don't think we need to rip it out. When
> Harsh tested it at one point we thought disabling super-page seemed to make
> the problem go away. Jacob tested and we still saw the need for Robin's patch.
> 
> Yes, the function looks humongous but i don't think we should wait for that 
> before this merge.

Ok.  Who wants to toss in review and testing sign-offs?  Clearly
there's been a lot more eyes and effort on this patch than reflected in
the original posting.  I'll add a stable cc.  Thanks,

Alex