linux-kernel - Re: Regression when booting 5.15 as dom0 on arm64 (WAS: Re: [linux-linus test] 161829: regressions

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: <20210510084057.GA933@lst.de>
Date:   Mon, 10 May 2021 10:40:57 +0200
From:   Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>
To:     Julien Grall <julien@....org>
Cc:     f.fainelli@...il.com, Stefano Stabellini <sstabellini@...nel.org>,
        "xen-devel@...ts.xenproject.org" <xen-devel@...ts.xenproject.org>,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        osstest service owner <osstest-admin@...project.org>,
        hch@....de, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk <konrad.wilk@...cle.com>,
        Boris Ostrovsky <boris.ostrovsky@...cle.com>,
        iommu@...ts.linux-foundation.org
Subject: Re: Regression when booting 5.15 as dom0 on arm64 (WAS: Re:
 [linux-linus test] 161829: regressions - FAIL)

On Sat, May 08, 2021 at 12:32:37AM +0100, Julien Grall wrote:
> The pointer dereferenced seems to suggest that the swiotlb hasn't been 
> allocated. From what I can tell, this may be because swiotlb_force is set 
> to SWIOTLB_NO_FORCE, we will still enable the swiotlb when running on top 
> of Xen.
>
> I am not entirely sure what would be the correct fix. Any opinions?

Can you try something like the patch below (not even compile tested, but
the intent should be obvious?


diff --git a/arch/arm64/mm/init.c b/arch/arm64/mm/init.c
index 16a2b2b1c54d..7671bc153fb1 100644
--- a/arch/arm64/mm/init.c
+++ b/arch/arm64/mm/init.c
@@ -44,6 +44,8 @@
 #include <asm/tlb.h>
 #include <asm/alternative.h>
 
+#include <xen/arm/swiotlb-xen.h>
+
 /*
  * We need to be able to catch inadvertent references to memstart_addr
  * that occur (potentially in generic code) before arm64_memblock_init()
@@ -482,7 +484,7 @@ void __init mem_init(void)
 	if (swiotlb_force == SWIOTLB_FORCE ||
 	    max_pfn > PFN_DOWN(arm64_dma_phys_limit))
 		swiotlb_init(1);
-	else
+	else if (!IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_XEN) || !xen_swiotlb_detect())
 		swiotlb_force = SWIOTLB_NO_FORCE;
 
 	set_max_mapnr(max_pfn - PHYS_PFN_OFFSET);