linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 1/1] s390/pv: fix the forcing of the swiotlb

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: <a89f1add-b0fb-1069-cb30-78864e399b19@de.ibm.com>
Date:   Tue, 27 Jul 2021 14:54:14 +0200
From:   Christian Borntraeger <borntraeger@...ibm.com>
To:     Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk <konrad@...nok.org>,
        Halil Pasic <pasic@...ux.ibm.com>
Cc:     Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk <konrad.wilk@...cle.com>,
        iommu@...ts.linux-foundation.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        Nathan Chancellor <nathan@...nel.org>,
        Vasily Gorbik <gor@...ux.ibm.com>,
        linux-s390 <linux-s390@...r.kernel.org>,
        Robin Murphy <robin.murphy@....com>,
        Heiko Carstens <hca@...ux.ibm.com>, stable@...r.kernel.org,
        Claire Chang <tientzu@...omium.org>,
        Will Deacon <will@...nel.org>, Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>,
        Guenter Roeck <linux@...ck-us.net>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/1] s390/pv: fix the forcing of the swiotlb


On 24.07.21 02:27, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk wrote:
> On Sat, Jul 24, 2021 at 01:17:46AM +0200, Halil Pasic wrote:
>> Since commit 903cd0f315fe ("swiotlb: Use is_swiotlb_force_bounce for
>> swiotlb data bouncing") if code sets swiotlb_force it needs to do so
>> before the swiotlb is initialised. Otherwise
>> io_tlb_default_mem->force_bounce will not get set to true, and devices
>> that use (the default) swiotlb will not bounce despite switolb_force
>> having the value of SWIOTLB_FORCE.
>>
>> Let us restore swiotlb functionality for PV by fulfilling this new
>> requirement.
>>
>> This change addresses what turned out to be a fragility in
>> commit 64e1f0c531d1 ("s390/mm: force swiotlb for protected
>> virtualization"), which ain't exactly broken in its original context,
>> but could give us some more headache if people backport the broken
>> change and forget this fix.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Halil Pasic <pasic@...ux.ibm.com>
>> Tested-by: Christian Borntraeger <borntraeger@...ibm.com>
>> Reviewed-by: Christian Borntraeger <borntraeger@...ibm.com>
>> Fixes: 903cd0f315fe ("swiotlb: Use is_swiotlb_force_bounce for swiotlb data bouncing")
>> Fixes: 64e1f0c531d1 ("s390/mm: force swiotlb for protected virtualization")
>> Cc: stable@...r.kernel.org #5.3+
>>
>> ---
> 
> Picked it up and stuck it in linux-next with the other set of patches (Will's fixes).

Can you push out to kernel.org?