linux-kernel - Re: [RFC PATCH 3/5] mm/vma: add support for peer to peer to device vma

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, 30 Jan 2019 17:44:31 +0000
From:   Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@...lanox.com>
To:     Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>
CC:     Logan Gunthorpe <logang@...tatee.com>,
        Jerome Glisse <jglisse@...hat.com>,
        "linux-mm@...ck.org" <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
        "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
        "Rafael J . Wysocki" <rafael@...nel.org>,
        Bjorn Helgaas <bhelgaas@...gle.com>,
        Christian Koenig <christian.koenig@....com>,
        Felix Kuehling <Felix.Kuehling@....com>,
        "linux-pci@...r.kernel.org" <linux-pci@...r.kernel.org>,
        "dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org" <dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org>,
        Marek Szyprowski <m.szyprowski@...sung.com>,
        Robin Murphy <robin.murphy@....com>,
        Joerg Roedel <jroedel@...e.de>,
        "iommu@...ts.linux-foundation.org" <iommu@...ts.linux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 3/5] mm/vma: add support for peer to peer to device
 vma

On Wed, Jan 30, 2019 at 09:02:08AM +0100, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 29, 2019 at 08:58:35PM +0000, Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
> > On Tue, Jan 29, 2019 at 01:39:49PM -0700, Logan Gunthorpe wrote:
> > 
> > > implement the mapping. And I don't think we should have 'special' vma's
> > > for this (though we may need something to ensure we don't get mapping
> > > requests mixed with different types of pages...).
> > 
> > I think Jerome explained the point here is to have a 'special vma'
> > rather than a 'special struct page' as, really, we don't need a
> > struct page at all to make this work.
> > 
> > If I recall your earlier attempts at adding struct page for BAR
> > memory, it ran aground on issues related to O_DIRECT/sgls, etc, etc.
> 
> Struct page is what makes O_DIRECT work, using sgls or biovecs, etc on
> it work.  Without struct page none of the above can work at all.  That
> is why we use struct page for backing BARs in the existing P2P code.
> Not that I'm a particular fan of creating struct page for this device
> memory, but without major invasive surgery to large parts of the kernel
> it is the only way to make it work.

I don't think anyone is interested in O_DIRECT/etc for RDMA doorbell
pages.

.. and again, I recall Logan already attempted to mix non-CPU memory
into sgls and it was a disaster. You pointed out that one cannot just
put iomem addressed into a SGL without auditing basically the entire
block stack to prove that nothing uses iomem without an iomem
accessor.

I recall that proposal veered into a direction where the block layer
would just fail very early if there was iomem in the sgl, so generally
no O_DIRECT support anyhow.

We already accepted the P2P stuff from Logan as essentially a giant
special case - it only works with RDMA and only because RDMA MR was
hacked up with a special p2p callback.

I don't see why a special case with a VMA is really that different.

If someone figures out the struct page path down the road it can
obviously be harmonized with this VMA approach pretty easily.

Jason