linux-kernel - Re: DMA direct mapping fix for 5.4 and earlier stable branches

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: <CAFA6WYO59w=wif8W16sG6BnzSjFhaY6PmRUTdSCu9A+zA7gzBw@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Tue, 9 Feb 2021 18:06:25 +0530
From:   Sumit Garg <sumit.garg@...aro.org>
To:     Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>
Cc:     Greg KH <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
        obayashi.yoshimasa@...ionext.com, m.szyprowski@...sung.com,
        robin.murphy@....com, iommu@...ts.linux-foundation.org,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        stable <stable@...r.kernel.org>,
        Daniel Thompson <daniel.thompson@...aro.org>
Subject: Re: DMA direct mapping fix for 5.4 and earlier stable branches

Hi Christoph,

On Tue, 9 Feb 2021 at 15:06, Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de> wrote:
>
> On Tue, Feb 09, 2021 at 10:23:12AM +0100, Greg KH wrote:
> > >   From the view point of ZeroCopy using DMABUF, is 5.4 not
> > > mature enough, and is 5.10 enough mature ?
> > >   This is the most important point for judging migration.
> >
> > How do you judge "mature"?
> >
> > And again, if a feature isn't present in a specific kernel version, why
> > would you think that it would be a viable solution for you to use?
>
> I'm pretty sure dma_get_sgtable has been around much longer and was
> supposed to work, but only really did work properly for arm32, and
> for platforms with coherent DMA.  I bet he is using non-coherent arm64,

It's an arm64 platform using coherent DMA where device coherent DMA
memory pool is defined in the DT as follows:

        reserved-memory {
                #address-cells = <2>;
                #size-cells = <2>;
                ranges;

                <snip>
                encbuffer: encbuffer@...0000000 {
                        compatible = "shared-dma-pool";
                        reg = <0 0xb0000000 0 0x08000000>; // this
area used with dma-coherent
                        no-map;
                };
                <snip>
        };

Device is dma-coherent as per following DT property:

                codec {
                        compatible = "socionext,uniphier-pxs3-codec";
                        <snip>
                        memory-region = <&encbuffer>;
                        dma-coherent;
                        <snip>
                };

And call chain to create device coherent DMA pool is as follows:

rmem_dma_device_init();
  dma_init_coherent_memory();
    memremap();
      ioremap_wc();

which simply maps coherent DMA memory into vmalloc space on arm64.

The thing I am unclear is why this is called a new feature rather than
a bug in dma_common_get_sgtable() which is failing to handle vmalloc
addresses? While at the same time DMA debug APIs specifically handle
vmalloc addresses [1].

[1] https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/stable/linux.git/tree/kernel/dma/debug.c?h=linux-5.4.y#n1462

-Sumit

> and it would be broken for other drivers there as well if people did
> test them, which they apparently so far did not.