linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH RFC] dma-direct: do not allocate a single page from CMA area

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20181101180439.GA4746@Asurada-Nvidia.nvidia.com>
Date:   Thu, 1 Nov 2018 11:04:40 -0700
From:   Nicolin Chen <nicoleotsuka@...il.com>
To:     Robin Murphy <robin.murphy@....com>
Cc:     hch@....de, m.szyprowski@...sung.com,
        iommu@...ts.linux-foundation.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        vdumpa@...dia.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC] dma-direct: do not allocate a single page from CMA
 area

Hi Robin,

Thanks for the comments.

On Thu, Nov 01, 2018 at 02:07:55PM +0000, Robin Murphy wrote:
> On 31/10/2018 20:03, Nicolin Chen wrote:
> > The addresses within a single page are always contiguous, so it's
> > not so necessary to allocate one single page from CMA area. Since
> > the CMA area has a limited predefined size of space, it might run
> > out of space in some heavy use case, where there might be quite a
> > lot CMA pages being allocated for single pages.
> > 
> > This patch tries to skip CMA allocations of single pages and lets
> > them go through normal page allocations. This would save resource
> > in the CMA area for further more CMA allocations.
> 
> In general, this seems to make sense to me. It does represent a theoretical
> change in behaviour for devices which have their own CMA area somewhere
> other than kernel memory, and only ever make non-atomic allocations, but I'm
> not sure whether that's a realistic or common enough case to really worry
> about.

Hmm..I don't quite understand the part of worrying its realisticness.
Would you mind elaborating a bit? As I tested this change on Tegra186
board, and saw some single-page allocations have been directed to the
normal allocation; and the "CmaFree" size reported from /proc/meminfo
is also increased. Does this mean it's realistic?

Thank you
Nicolin

-----

> 
> Robin.
> 
> > Signed-off-by: Nicolin Chen <nicoleotsuka@...il.com>
> > ---
> >   kernel/dma/direct.c | 8 ++++++--
> >   1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> > 
> > diff --git a/kernel/dma/direct.c b/kernel/dma/direct.c
> > index 22a12ab5a5e9..14c5d49eded2 100644
> > --- a/kernel/dma/direct.c
> > +++ b/kernel/dma/direct.c
> > @@ -120,8 +120,12 @@ void *dma_direct_alloc_pages(struct device *dev, size_t size,
> >   	gfp |= __dma_direct_optimal_gfp_mask(dev, dev->coherent_dma_mask,
> >   			&phys_mask);
> >   again:
> > -	/* CMA can be used only in the context which permits sleeping */
> > -	if (gfpflags_allow_blocking(gfp)) {
> > +	/*
> > +	 * CMA can be used only in the context which permits sleeping.
> > +	 * Since addresses within one PAGE are always contiguous, skip
> > +	 * CMA allocation for a single page to save CMA reserved space
> > +	 */
> > +	if (gfpflags_allow_blocking(gfp) && count > 1) {
> >   		page = dma_alloc_from_contiguous(dev, count, page_order,
> >   						 gfp & __GFP_NOWARN);
> >   		if (page && !dma_coherent_ok(dev, page_to_phys(page), size)) {
> >