linux-kernel - Re: [RFC PATCH v2 04/11] PCI/P2PDMA: Introduce pci_p2pdma_should_map_bus() and pci_p2pdma_bus

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:   Mon, 15 Mar 2021 10:30:45 -0600
From:   Logan Gunthorpe <logang@...tatee.com>
To:     Ira Weiny <ira.weiny@...el.com>
Cc:     linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-nvme@...ts.infradead.org,
        linux-block@...r.kernel.org, linux-pci@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-mm@...ck.org, iommu@...ts.linux-foundation.org,
        Stephen Bates <sbates@...thlin.com>,
        Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>,
        Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@...el.com>,
        Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@...pe.ca>,
        Christian König <christian.koenig@....com>,
        Ira Weiny <iweiny@...el.com>,
        John Hubbard <jhubbard@...dia.com>,
        Don Dutile <ddutile@...hat.com>,
        Matthew Wilcox <willy@...radead.org>,
        Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@...ll.ch>,
        Jakowski Andrzej <andrzej.jakowski@...el.com>,
        Minturn Dave B <dave.b.minturn@...el.com>,
        Jason Ekstrand <jason@...kstrand.net>,
        Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com>,
        Xiong Jianxin <jianxin.xiong@...el.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v2 04/11] PCI/P2PDMA: Introduce
 pci_p2pdma_should_map_bus() and pci_p2pdma_bus_offset()



On 2021-03-12 7:32 p.m., Ira Weiny wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 11, 2021 at 04:31:34PM -0700, Logan Gunthorpe wrote:
>> Introduce pci_p2pdma_should_map_bus() which is meant to be called by
>             ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> 	    pci_p2pdma_dma_map_type() ???
> 
> FWIW I find this name confusing with pci_p2pdma_map_type() and looking at the
> implementation I'm not clear why pci_p2pdma_dma_map_type() needs to exist?

Yeah, there are subtle differences in prototype. But yes, they can
probably be combined. Will do for future postings.

>> + * pci_p2pdma_dma_map_type - determine if a DMA mapping should use the
>> + *	bus address, be mapped normally or fail
>> + * @dev: device doing the DMA request
>> + * @pgmap: dev_pagemap structure for the mapping
>> + *
>> + * Returns:
>> + *    1 - if the page should be mapped with a bus address,
>> + *    0 - if the page should be mapped normally through an IOMMU mapping or
>> + *        physical address; or
>> + *   -1 - if the device should not map the pages and an error should be
>> + *        returned
>> + */
>> +int pci_p2pdma_dma_map_type(struct device *dev, struct dev_pagemap *pgmap)
>> +{
>> +	struct pci_p2pdma_pagemap *p2p_pgmap = to_p2p_pgmap(pgmap);
>> +	struct pci_dev *client;
>> +
>> +	if (!dev_is_pci(dev))
>> +		return -1;
>> +
>> +	client = to_pci_dev(dev);
>> +
>> +	switch (pci_p2pdma_map_type(p2p_pgmap->provider, client)) {
>> +	case PCI_P2PDMA_MAP_THRU_HOST_BRIDGE:
>> +		return 0;
>> +	case PCI_P2PDMA_MAP_BUS_ADDR:
>> +		return 1;
>> +	default:
>> +		return -1;
>> +	}
>> +}
>> +EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(pci_p2pdma_dma_map_type);
> 
> I guess the main point here is to export this to the DMA layer?

Yes, that's correct.

Logan