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: <da218bdf-198e-b064-356d-3354869a670a@arm.com>
Date:   Wed, 11 Jul 2018 19:03:55 +0100
From:   Robin Murphy <robin.murphy@....com>
To:     Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>
Cc:     devicetree@...r.kernel.org, gregkh@...uxfoundation.org,
        x86@...nel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org, iommu@...ts.linux-foundation.org,
        robh+dt@...nel.org, sudeep.holla@....com, frowand.list@...il.com,
        linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 2/4] ACPI/IORT: Set bus DMA mask as appropriate

On 10/07/18 19:04, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 10, 2018 at 06:17:17PM +0100, Robin Murphy wrote:
>> When an explicit DMA limit is described by firmware, we need to remember
>> it regardless of how drivers might subsequently update their devices'
>> masks. The new bus_dma_mask field does that.
> 
> Shouldn't we also stop presetting the dma mask after this?

I guess initialising the device masks here only really has any effect if 
drivers fail to set their own, so if we're getting stricter about that 
then it would make sense to stop; I'll add a couple of patches on top to 
clean that up.

Robin.

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ