linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v4 0/7] Convert the intel iommu driver to the dma-iommu api

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:   Tue, 3 Nov 2020 09:14:32 +0000
From:   Tvrtko Ursulin <tvrtko.ursulin@...ux.intel.com>
To:     Lu Baolu <baolu.lu@...ux.intel.com>,
        Joerg Roedel <joro@...tes.org>, Tom Murphy <murphyt7@....ie>,
        David Woodhouse <dwmw2@...radead.org>,
        Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>
Cc:     Ashok Raj <ashok.raj@...el.com>, Intel-gfx@...ts.freedesktop.org,
        iommu@...ts.linux-foundation.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        Joonas Lahtinen <joonas.lahtinen@...ux.intel.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 0/7] Convert the intel iommu driver to the dma-iommu
 api



On 03/11/2020 02:53, Lu Baolu wrote:
> On 11/2/20 7:52 PM, Tvrtko Ursulin wrote:
>>
>> On 02/11/2020 02:00, Lu Baolu wrote:
>>> Hi Tvrtko,
>>> On 10/12/20 4:44 PM, Tvrtko Ursulin wrote:
>>>>
>>>> On 29/09/2020 01:11, Lu Baolu wrote:
>>>>> Hi Tvrtko,
>>>>>
>>>>> On 9/28/20 5:44 PM, Tvrtko Ursulin wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On 27/09/2020 07:34, Lu Baolu wrote:
>>>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> The previous post of this series could be found here.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> https://lore.kernel.org/linux-iommu/20200912032200.11489-1-baolu.lu@linux.intel.com/ 
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> This version introduce a new patch [4/7] to fix an issue reported 
>>>>>>> here.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> https://lore.kernel.org/linux-iommu/51a1baec-48d1-c0ac-181b-1fba92aa428d@linux.intel.com/ 
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> There aren't any other changes.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Please help to test and review.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Best regards,
>>>>>>> baolu
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Lu Baolu (3):
>>>>>>>    iommu: Add quirk for Intel graphic devices in map_sg
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Since I do have patches to fix i915 to handle this, do we want to 
>>>>>> co-ordinate the two and avoid having to add this quirk and then 
>>>>>> later remove it? Or you want to go the staged approach?
>>>>>
>>>>> I have no preference. It depends on which patch goes first. Let the
>>>>> maintainers help here.
>>>>
>>>> FYI we have merged the required i915 patches to out tree last week 
>>>> or so. I *think* this means they will go into 5.11. So the i915 
>>>> specific workaround patch will not be needed in Intel IOMMU.
>>>
>>> Do you mind telling me what's the status of this fix patch? I tried this
>>> series on v5.10-rc1 with the graphic quirk patch dropped. I am still
>>> seeing dma faults from graphic device.
>>
>> Hmm back then I thought i915 fixes for this would land in 5.11 so I 
>> will stick with that. :) (See my quoted text a paragraph above yours.)
> 
> What size are those fixes? I am considering pushing this series for
> v5.11. Is it possible to get some acks for those patches and let them
> go to Linus through iommu tree?

For 5.10 you mean? They feel a bit too large for comfort to go via a 
non-i915/drm tree. These are the two patches required:

https://cgit.freedesktop.org/drm-intel/commit/?h=drm-intel-gt-next&id=8a473dbadccfc6206150de3db3223c40785da348
https://cgit.freedesktop.org/drm-intel/commit/?h=drm-intel-gt-next&id=934941ed5a3070a7833c688c9b1d71484fc01a68

I'll copy Joonas as our maintainer - how does the idea of taking the 
above two patches through the iommu tree sound to you?

Regards,

Tvrtko