linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 1/2] drm: add cache support for arm64

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: <20190807123807.GD54191@lakrids.cambridge.arm.com>
Date:   Wed, 7 Aug 2019 13:38:08 +0100
From:   Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>
To:     Rob Clark <robdclark@...omium.org>
Cc:     Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>, Rob Clark <robdclark@...il.com>,
        dri-devel <dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org>,
        Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@....com>,
        Will Deacon <will@...nel.org>,
        Maarten Lankhorst <maarten.lankhorst@...ux.intel.com>,
        Maxime Ripard <maxime.ripard@...tlin.com>,
        Sean Paul <sean@...rly.run>, David Airlie <airlied@...ux.ie>,
        Daniel Vetter <daniel@...ll.ch>,
        Allison Randal <allison@...utok.net>,
        Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
        linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
        LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] drm: add cache support for arm64

On Tue, Aug 06, 2019 at 09:31:55AM -0700, Rob Clark wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 6, 2019 at 7:35 AM Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com> wrote:
> >
> > On Tue, Aug 06, 2019 at 07:11:41AM -0700, Rob Clark wrote:
> > > On Tue, Aug 6, 2019 at 1:48 AM Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > This goes in the wrong direction.  drm_cflush_* are a bad API we need to
> > > > get rid of, not add use of it.  The reason for that is two-fold:
> > > >
> > > >  a) it doesn't address how cache maintaince actually works in most
> > > >     platforms.  When talking about a cache we three fundamental operations:
> > > >
> > > >         1) write back - this writes the content of the cache back to the
> > > >            backing memory
> > > >         2) invalidate - this remove the content of the cache
> > > >         3) write back + invalidate - do both of the above
> > >
> > > Agreed that drm_cflush_* isn't a great API.  In this particular case
> > > (IIUC), I need wb+inv so that there aren't dirty cache lines that drop
> > > out to memory later, and so that I don't get a cache hit on
> > > uncached/wc mmap'ing.
> >
> > Is there a cacheable alias lying around (e.g. the linear map), or are
> > these addresses only mapped uncached/wc?
> >
> > If there's a cacheable alias, performing an invalidate isn't sufficient,
> > since a CPU can allocate a new (clean) entry at any point in time (e.g.
> > as a result of prefetching or arbitrary speculation).
> 
> I *believe* that there are not alias mappings (that I don't control
> myself) for pages coming from
> shmem_file_setup()/shmem_read_mapping_page()..  

AFAICT, that's regular anonymous memory, so there will be a cacheable
alias in the linear/direct map.

> digging around at what dma_sync_sg_* does under the hood, it looks
> like it is just arch_sync_dma_for_cpu/device(), so I guess that should
> be sufficient for what I need.

I don't think that's the case, per the example I gave above.

Thanks,
Mark.