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, 2 Feb 2021 02:51:30 +0000
From:   "Tian, Kevin" <>
To:     Jason Gunthorpe <>
CC:     "Song Bao Hua (Barry Song)" <>,
        "chensihang (A)" <>,
        Arnd Bergmann <>,
        "Greg Kroah-Hartman" <>,
        "" <>,
        "" <>,
        "" <>,
        Zhangfei Gao <>,
        "Liguozhu (Kenneth)" <>,
Subject: RE: [RFC PATCH v2] uacce: Add uacce_ctrl misc device

> From: Jason Gunthorpe <>
> Sent: Tuesday, February 2, 2021 7:44 AM
> On Fri, Jan 29, 2021 at 10:09:03AM +0000, Tian, Kevin wrote:
> > > SVA is not doom to work with IO page fault only. If we have SVA+pin,
> > > we would get both sharing address and stable I/O latency.
> >
> > Isn't it like a traditional MAP_DMA API (imply pinning) plus specifying
> > cpu_va of the memory pool as the iova?
> I think their issue is the HW can't do the cpu_va trick without also
> involving the system IOMMU in a SVA mode

This is the part that I didn't understand. Using cpu_va in a MAP_DMA
interface doesn't require device support. It's just an user-specified
address to be mapped into the IOMMU page table. On the other hand,
sharing CPU page table through a SVA interface for an usage where I/O 
page faults must be completely avoided seems a misleading attempt. 
Even if people do want this model (e.g. mix pinning+fault), it should be
a mm syscall as Greg pointed out, not specific to sva.


Powered by blists - more mailing lists