linux-kernel - Re: Phyr Starter

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:   Thu, 20 Jan 2022 14:56:02 +0100
From:   Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>
To:     Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@...dia.com>
Cc:     Matthew Wilcox <willy@...radead.org>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>,
        Joao Martins <joao.m.martins@...cle.com>,
        John Hubbard <jhubbard@...dia.com>,
        Logan Gunthorpe <logang@...tatee.com>,
        Ming Lei <ming.lei@...hat.com>, linux-block@...r.kernel.org,
        netdev@...r.kernel.org, linux-mm@...ck.org,
        linux-rdma@...r.kernel.org, dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org,
        nvdimm@...ts.linux.dev
Subject: Re: Phyr Starter

On Mon, Jan 10, 2022 at 08:41:26PM -0400, Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
> > Finally, it may be possible to stop using scatterlist to describe the
> > input to the DMA-mapping operation.  We may be able to get struct
> > scatterlist down to just dma_address and dma_length, with chaining
> > handled through an enclosing struct.
> 
> Can you talk about this some more? IMHO one of the key properties of
> the scatterlist is that it can hold huge amounts of pages without
> having to do any kind of special allocation due to the chaining.
> 
> The same will be true of the phyr idea right?

No special allocations as in no vmalloc?  The chaining still has to
allocate memory using a mempool.

Anyway, to explain my idea which is very similar but not identical to
the one willy has:

 - on the input side to dma mapping the bio_vecs (or phyrs) are chained
   as bios or whatever the containing structure is.  These already exist
   and have infrastructure at least in the block layer
 - on the output side I plan for two options:

	1) we have a sane IOMMU and everyting will be coalesced into a
	   single dma_range.  This requires setting the block layer
	   merge boundary to match the IOMMU page size, but that is
	   a very good thing to do anyway.
	2) we have no IOMMU (or a weird one) and get one output dma_range
	   per input bio_vec.  We'd eithe have to support chaining or use
	   vmalloc or huge numbers of entries.

> If you limit to that scenario then we can be more optimal because
> things like byte granular offsets and size in the interior pages don't
> need to exist. Every interior chunk is always aligned to its order and
> we only need to record the order.

The block layer does not small offsets.  Direct I/O can often be
512 byte aligned, and some other passthrough commands can have even
smaller alignment, although I don't think we ever go below 4-byte
alignment anywhere in the block layer.

> IMHO storage density here is quite important, we end up having to keep
> this stuff around for a long time.

If we play these tricks it won't be general purpose enough to get rid
of the existing scatterlist usage.