linux-kernel - Re: [RFC PATCH 0/4] Stop losing firmware-set DMA masks

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: <CABGGisxVqLMu3TUpbJGWnUFgzUor-8tdyV8KJeU0YT7y=BHrAQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Wed, 11 Jul 2018 08:40:30 -0600
From:   Rob Herring <rob.herring@...aro.org>
To:     Robin Murphy <robin.murphy@....com>
Cc:     Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>, m.szyprowski@...sung.com,
        iommu@...ts.linux-foundation.org,
        linux-arm-kernel <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
        linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org, devicetree@...r.kernel.org,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Lorenzo Pieralisi <lorenzo.pieralisi@....com>,
        hanjun.guo@...aro.org, Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@....com>,
        Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
        Frank Rowand <frowand.list@...il.com>,
        Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
        joro@...tes.org, x86@...nel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 0/4] Stop losing firmware-set DMA masks

On Tue, Jul 10, 2018 at 12:43 PM Robin Murphy <robin.murphy@....com> wrote:
>
> Whilst the common firmware code invoked by dma_configure() initialises
> devices' DMA masks according to limitations described by the respective
> properties ("dma-ranges" for OF and _DMA/IORT for ACPI), the nature of
> the dma_set_mask() API leads to that information getting lost when
> well-behaved drivers probe and set a 64-bit mask, since in general
> there's no way to tell the difference between a firmware-described mask
> (which should be respected) and whatever default may have come from the
> bus code (which should be replaced outright). This can break DMA on
> systems with certain IOMMU topologies (e.g. [1]) where the IOMMU driver
> only knows its maximum supported address size, not how many of those
> address bits might actually be wired up between any of its input
> interfaces and the associated DMA master devices. Similarly, some PCIe
> root complexes only have a 32-bit native interface on their host bridge,
> which leads to the same DMA-address-truncation problem in systems with a
> larger physical memory map and RAM above 4GB (e.g. [2]).
>
> These patches attempt to deal with this in the simplest way possible by
> generalising the specific quirk for 32-bit bridges into an arbitrary
> mask which can then also be plumbed into the firmware code. In the
> interest of being minimally invasive, I've only included a point fix
> for the IOMMU issue as seen on arm64 - there may be further tweaks
> needed in DMA ops to catch all possible incarnations of this problem,
> but this initial RFC is mostly about the impact beyond the dma-mapping
> subsystem itself.

Couldn't you set and use the device's parent's dma_mask instead. At
least for DT, we should always have a parent device representing the
bus. That would avoid further bloating of struct device.

Rob