linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2] dma-buf: heaps: init heaps in subsys

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Fri, 22 Oct 2021 08:32:45 +0200
From:   Christian König <christian.koenig@....com>
To:     John Stultz <john.stultz@...aro.org>,
        Shuosheng Huang <huangshuosheng@...winnertech.com>
Cc:     Sumit Semwal <sumit.semwal@...aro.org>,
        Liam Mark <lmark@...eaurora.org>,
        Laura Abbott <labbott@...hat.com>,
        Brian Starkey <Brian.Starkey@....com>,
        linux-media <linux-media@...r.kernel.org>,
        dri-devel <dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org>,
        lkml <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] dma-buf: heaps: init heaps in subsys_initcall



Am 22.10.21 um 04:56 schrieb John Stultz:
> On Thu, Oct 21, 2021 at 6:49 PM Shuosheng Huang
> <huangshuosheng@...winnertech.com> wrote:
>> Some built-in modules will failed to use dma-buf heap to allocate
>> memory if the heap drivers are too late to be initialized.
>> To fix this issue, move initialization of dma-buf heap drivers in
>> subsys_initcall() which is more earlier to be called.
> Hey! Thanks so much for sending this out! I appreciate it!
>
> So the change looks pretty straightforward to me, however, the
> rationale for it is where we hit problems.
>
> With the upstream kernel, there are not yet any modules that directly
> allocate from dmabuf heaps. So in the context of the upstream kernel,
> the reasoning doesn't make much sense.

I was already wondering which driver does that.

> Now, I know folks have their own drivers that want to allocate from
> dmabuf heaps, but those haven't been submitted upstream yet.
> So maybe can you submit those patches that need this along with this
> change so it would make sense as part of a patch series? It would be
> trivial to justify including this patch then.

Yes, agree. This patch here alone has no justification to be upstream.

Regards,
Christian.

>
> thanks
> -john