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:   Tue, 27 Jul 2021 13:57:55 +0100
From:   Will Deacon <will@...nel.org>
To:     Christian Borntraeger <borntraeger@...ibm.com>
Cc:     Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk <konrad@...nok.org>,
        Halil Pasic <pasic@...ux.ibm.com>,
        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>,
        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 Tue, Jul 27, 2021 at 02:54:14PM +0200, Christian Borntraeger wrote:
> 
> 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?

It's pushed to the swiotlb tree:

https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/konrad/swiotlb.git/log/?h=devel/for-linus-5.15

Since none of the restricted DMA series is in mainline yet, I don't think
it's needed anywhere else.

Will

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ