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  PHC 
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
 
Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.
[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date:   Tue, 13 Mar 2018 22:02:05 -0400
From:   Nicolas Dufresne <nicolas@...fresne.ca>
To:     Stanimir Varbanov <stanimir.varbanov@...aro.org>,
        Sakari Ailus <sakari.ailus@....fi>
Cc:     Mauro Carvalho Chehab <mchehab@...nel.org>,
        Pawel Osciak <pawel@...iak.com>,
        Marek Szyprowski <m.szyprowski@...sung.com>,
        Kyungmin Park <kyungmin.park@...sung.com>,
        linux-media@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] media: vb2: unify calling of set_page_dirty_lock

Le mardi 13 mars 2018 à 21:09 -0400, Nicolas Dufresne a écrit :
> > I've looked into this again. I have hit the same issue but with CPU
> > to
> > DRM, using DMABuf allocated from DRM Dumb buffers. In that case,
> > using
> > DMA_BUF_IOCTL_SYNC fixes the issues.
> > 
> > This raises a lot of question around the model used in V4L2. As you
> > mention, prepare/finish are missing in dma-vmalloc mem_ops. I'll
> > give
> > a
> > try implementing that, it should cover my initial use case, but
> > then
> > I
> > believe it will fail if my pipeline is:
> > 
> >    UVC -> in plane CPU modification -> DRM
> > 
> > Because we don't implement begin/end_cpu_access on our exported
> > DMABuf.
> > It should also fail for the following use case:
> > 
> >    UVC (importer) -> DRM
> > 
> > UVC driver won't call the remote dmabuf being/end_cpu_access
> > method.
> > This one is difficult because UVC driver and vivid don't seem to be
> > aware of being an importer, exported or simply exporting to CPU
> > (through mmap). I believe what we have now pretty much assumes the
> > what
> > we export as vmalloc is to be used by CPU only. Also, the usual
> > direction used by prepare/finish ops won't work for drivers like
> > vivid
> > and UVC that write into the buffers using the cpu.
> > 
> > To be continued ...
> 
> While I was writing that, I was already outdated, as of now, we only
> have one ops, called sync. This implements the to_cpu direction only.

Replying to myself again, obviously looking at the old videobuf code
can only get one confused.

Nicolas

Powered by blists - more mailing lists