linux-kernel - Re: remove the ->mapping_error method from dma_map

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]

Date:   Wed, 28 Nov 2018 17:45:45 +0000
From:   Russell King - ARM Linux <linux@...linux.org.uk>
To:     Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc:     Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>, linux-arch@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-ia64@...r.kernel.org, linux-parisc@...r.kernel.org,
        robin.murphy@....com, the arch/x86 maintainers <x86@...nel.org>,
        Linux List Kernel Mailing <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        iommu@...ts.linux-foundation.org, linux-alpha@...r.kernel.org,
        xen-devel@...ts.xenproject.org,
        David Woodhouse <dwmw2@...radead.org>,
        linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org
Subject: Re: remove the ->mapping_error method from dma_map_ops V2

On Wed, Nov 28, 2018 at 08:47:05AM -0800, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 27, 2018 at 11:41 PM Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de> wrote:
> >
> > On Fri, Nov 23, 2018 at 07:55:11AM +0100, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> > > Well, I can tweak the last patch to return -EINVAL from dma_mapping_error
> > > instead of the old 1 is as bool true.  The callers should all be fine,
> > > although I'd have to audit them.  Still wouldn't help with being able to
> > > return different errors.
> >
> > Any opinions?  I'd really like to make some forward progress on this
> > series.
> 
> So I do think that yes, dma_mapping_error() should return an error
> code, not 0/1.
> 
> But I was really hoping that the individual drivers themselves could
> return error codes. Right now the patch-series has code like this:
> 
>       ret = needs_bounce(dev, dma_addr, size);
>       if (ret < 0)
> -         return ARM_MAPPING_ERROR;
> +         return DMA_MAPPING_ERROR;
> 
> which while it all makes sense in the context of this patch-series, I
> *really* think it would have been so much nicer to return the error
> code 'ret' instead (which in this case is -E2BIG).
> 
> I don't think this is a huge deal, but ERR_PTR() has been hugely
> successful elsewhere. And I'm not hugely convinced about all these
> "any address can be valid" arguments. How the hell do you generate a
> random dma address in the last page that isn't even page-aligned?

kmalloc() a 64-byte buffer, dma_map_single() that buffer.  If you
have RAM that maps to a _bus_ address in the top page of 4GB of a
32-bit bus address, then you lose.  Simples.

Subsystems like I2C, SPI, USB etc all deal with small kmalloc'd
buffers and their drivers make use of DMA.

-- 
RMK's Patch system: http://www.armlinux.org.uk/developer/patches/
FTTC broadband for 0.8mile line in suburbia: sync at 12.1Mbps down 622kbps up
According to speedtest.net: 11.9Mbps down 500kbps up