linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v4 1/1] drm: allow limiting the scatter list size.

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20200908113712.GL2352366@phenom.ffwll.local>
Date:   Tue, 8 Sep 2020 13:37:12 +0200
From:   Daniel Vetter <daniel@...ll.ch>
To:     Gerd Hoffmann <kraxel@...hat.com>
Cc:     dri-devel <dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org>,
        Christian König <christian.koenig@....com>,
        Alex Deucher <alexander.deucher@....com>,
        David Airlie <airlied@...ux.ie>,
        Maarten Lankhorst <maarten.lankhorst@...ux.intel.com>,
        Maxime Ripard <mripard@...nel.org>,
        Thomas Zimmermann <tzimmermann@...e.de>,
        Lucas Stach <l.stach@...gutronix.de>,
        Russell King <linux+etnaviv@...linux.org.uk>,
        Christian Gmeiner <christian.gmeiner@...il.com>,
        Rob Clark <robdclark@...il.com>, Sean Paul <sean@...rly.run>,
        Ben Skeggs <bskeggs@...hat.com>,
        Sandy Huang <hjc@...k-chips.com>,
        Heiko Stübner <heiko@...ech.de>,
        Thierry Reding <thierry.reding@...il.com>,
        Jonathan Hunter <jonathanh@...dia.com>,
        Oleksandr Andrushchenko <oleksandr_andrushchenko@...m.com>,
        "open list:RADEON and AMDGPU DRM DRIVERS" 
        <amd-gfx@...ts.freedesktop.org>,
        open list <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        "moderated list:DRM DRIVERS FOR VIVANTE GPU IP" 
        <etnaviv@...ts.freedesktop.org>,
        "open list:DRM DRIVER FOR MSM ADRENO GPU" 
        <linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org>,
        "open list:DRM DRIVER FOR MSM ADRENO GPU" 
        <freedreno@...ts.freedesktop.org>,
        "open list:DRM DRIVER FOR NVIDIA GEFORCE/QUADRO GPUS" 
        <nouveau@...ts.freedesktop.org>,
        "moderated list:ARM/Rockchip SoC support" 
        <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
        "open list:ARM/Rockchip SoC support" 
        <linux-rockchip@...ts.infradead.org>,
        "open list:DRM DRIVERS FOR NVIDIA TEGRA" 
        <linux-tegra@...r.kernel.org>,
        "moderated list:DRM DRIVERS FOR XEN" <xen-devel@...ts.xenproject.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 1/1] drm: allow limiting the scatter list size.

On Tue, Sep 08, 2020 at 12:02:53PM +0200, Gerd Hoffmann wrote:
> > > > The comments I've found suggest very much not ... Or is that all very
> > > > old stuff only that no one cares about anymore?
> > > 
> > > I think these days it is possible to override dma_ops per device, which
> > > in turn allows virtio to deal with the quirks without the rest of the
> > > kernel knowing about these details.
> > > 
> > > I also think virtio-gpu can drop the virtio_has_dma_quirk() checks, just
> > > use the dma api path unconditionally and depend on virtio core having
> > > setup dma_ops in a way that it JustWorks[tm].  I'll look into that next.
> > 
> > The comment above vring_use_dma_api() suggests that this has not yet
> > happened, that's why I'm asking.
> 
> Hmm, wading through the code, seems it indeed happen yet, even though my
> testing didn't show any issues.  Probably pure luck because devices and
> cpus have the same memory view on x86.  Guess I need to try this on
> ppc64 to see it actually failing ...
> 
> So dropping the virtio_has_dma_quirk() checks isn't going to fly.
> 
> Using dma_max_mapping_size() should be fine though.  It might use a
> lower limit than needed for virtio, but it should not break things.

Makes sense. On this patch here:

Reviewed-by: Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@...ll.ch>

And I guess would be good if virtio pushes a bit more towards using the
dma api abstraction fully so we can get rid of these hacks. Virtio feels
like a driver that really should be using dma-api and not dig around
behind it because "it' makes stuff 0.5% faster" or so, since being
virtualized it's already not the king of speed anyway :-)

Cheers, Daniel
-- 
Daniel Vetter
Software Engineer, Intel Corporation
http://blog.ffwll.ch