linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v3] powerpc/pseries/svm: Allocate SWIOTLB buffer anywhere in memory

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: <87lfiaeg14.fsf@morokweng.localdomain>
Date:   Wed, 19 Aug 2020 13:50:31 -0300
From:   Thiago Jung Bauermann <bauerman@...ux.ibm.com>
To:     Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>
Cc:     iommu@...ts.linux-foundation.org, linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk <konrad.wilk@...cle.com>,
        Marek Szyprowski <m.szyprowski@...sung.com>,
        Robin Murphy <robin.murphy@....com>,
        Michael Ellerman <mpe@...erman.id.au>,
        Ram Pai <linuxram@...ibm.com>,
        Satheesh Rajendran <sathnaga@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3] powerpc/pseries/svm: Allocate SWIOTLB buffer anywhere in memory


Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de> writes:

> On Tue, Aug 18, 2020 at 07:11:26PM -0300, Thiago Jung Bauermann wrote:
>> POWER secure guests (i.e., guests which use the Protection Execution
>> Facility) need to use SWIOTLB to be able to do I/O with the hypervisor, but
>> they don't need the SWIOTLB memory to be in low addresses since the
>> hypervisor doesn't have any addressing limitation.
>> 
>> This solves a SWIOTLB initialization problem we are seeing in secure guests
>> with 128 GB of RAM: they are configured with 4 GB of crashkernel reserved
>> memory, which leaves no space for SWIOTLB in low addresses.
>> 
>> To do this, we use mostly the same code as swiotlb_init(), but allocate the
>> buffer using memblock_alloc() instead of memblock_alloc_low().
>> 
>> Signed-off-by: Thiago Jung Bauermann <bauerman@...ux.ibm.com>
>
> Looks fine to me (except for the pointlessly long comment lines, but I've
> been told that's the powerpc way).

Thanks! Do I have your Reviewed-by?

-- 
Thiago Jung Bauermann
IBM Linux Technology Center