linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 1/4] iommu/arm-smmu-v3: Use command queue batching helpers to improve performance

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: <5482d2e5-24db-6139-a8a8-74be1282e2ec@huawei.com>
Date:   Mon, 16 Aug 2021 10:15:37 +0800
From:   "Leizhen (ThunderTown)" <thunder.leizhen@...wei.com>
To:     John Garry <john.garry@...wei.com>,
        Robin Murphy <robin.murphy@....com>,
        Will Deacon <will@...nel.org>, Joerg Roedel <joro@...tes.org>,
        linux-arm-kernel <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
        iommu <iommu@...ts.linux-foundation.org>,
        <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/4] iommu/arm-smmu-v3: Use command queue batching helpers
 to improve performance



On 2021/8/14 0:45, John Garry wrote:
> On 13/08/2021 17:01, Robin Murphy wrote:
>>>
>>> diff --git a/drivers/iommu/arm/arm-smmu-v3/arm-smmu-v3.c b/drivers/iommu/arm/arm-smmu-v3/arm-smmu-v3.c
>>> index 235f9bdaeaf223b..c81cd929047f573 100644
>>> --- a/drivers/iommu/arm/arm-smmu-v3/arm-smmu-v3.c
>>> +++ b/drivers/iommu/arm/arm-smmu-v3/arm-smmu-v3.c
>>> @@ -1747,15 +1747,16 @@ static int arm_smmu_atc_inv_master(struct arm_smmu_master *master)
>>>   {
>>>       int i;
>>>       struct arm_smmu_cmdq_ent cmd;
>>> +    struct arm_smmu_cmdq_batch cmds = {};
>>
>> BTW, it looks like this has crossed over with John's patch removing these.
> 
> It is only called from arm_smmu_disable_ats(), so not hot-path by the look for it. Or who even has ats HW ...?
> 
> But it should be at least cleaned-up for consistency. Leizhen?

Okay, I'll revise it. But Will already took it. So I'm not sure whether to send v2 or a separate patch.

> 
> Thanks,
> John
> .
>