linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 1/2] xen/arm64: do not set SWIOTLB_NO

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: <20210512072645.GA22396@lst.de>
Date:   Wed, 12 May 2021 09:26:45 +0200
From:   Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>
To:     Stefano Stabellini <sstabellini@...nel.org>
Cc:     xen-devel@...ts.xenproject.org, hch@....de,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        Stefano Stabellini <stefano.stabellini@...inx.com>,
        boris.ostrovsky@...cle.com, jgross@...e.com,
        catalin.marinas@....com, will@...nel.org,
        linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] xen/arm64: do not set SWIOTLB_NO_FORCE when
 swiotlb is required

> -int xen_swiotlb_detect(void)
> -{
> -	if (!xen_domain())
> -		return 0;
> -	if (xen_feature(XENFEAT_direct_mapped))
> -		return 1;
> -	/* legacy case */
> -	if (!xen_feature(XENFEAT_not_direct_mapped) && xen_initial_domain())
> -		return 1;
> -	return 0;
> -}

I think this move should be a separate prep patch.