linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 07/10] crypto: Use ARCH_DMA_MINALIGN instead of ARCH_KMALLOC

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: <CAMZfGtUWGkMNndjWFRqwimzV4m+Z63ZpLdyrFAFn3oV+EXGSZw@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Thu, 7 Apr 2022 18:00:10 +0800
From:   Muchun Song <songmuchun@...edance.com>
To:     Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@....com>
Cc:     Will Deacon <will@...nel.org>, Marc Zyngier <maz@...nel.org>,
        Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>,
        Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
        Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
        Linux Memory Management List <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
        LAK <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Herbert Xu <herbert@...dor.apana.org.au>,
        "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 07/10] crypto: Use ARCH_DMA_MINALIGN instead of ARCH_KMALLOC_MINALIGN

On Thu, Apr 7, 2022 at 5:25 PM Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@....com> wrote:
>
> On Thu, Apr 07, 2022 at 02:14:15PM +0800, Muchun Song wrote:
> > On Tue, Apr 05, 2022 at 02:57:55PM +0100, Catalin Marinas wrote:
> > > ARCH_DMA_MINALIGN represents the minimum (static) alignment for safe DMA
> > > operations while ARCH_KMALLOC_MINALIGN is the minimum kmalloc() objects
> > > alignment.
> > >
> > > Signed-off-by: Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@....com>
> > > Cc: Herbert Xu <herbert@...dor.apana.org.au>
> > > Cc: "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>
> > > ---
> > >  include/linux/crypto.h | 2 +-
> > >  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
> > >
> > > diff --git a/include/linux/crypto.h b/include/linux/crypto.h
> > > index 2324ab6f1846..654b9c355575 100644
> > > --- a/include/linux/crypto.h
> > > +++ b/include/linux/crypto.h
> > > @@ -167,7 +167,7 @@
> > >   * maintenance for non-coherent DMA (cache invalidation in particular) does not
> > >   * affect data that may be accessed by the CPU concurrently.
> > >   */
> > > -#define CRYPTO_MINALIGN ARCH_KMALLOC_MINALIGN
> > > +#define CRYPTO_MINALIGN ARCH_DMA_MINALIGN
> >
> > I don't think this should be changed since ARCH_KMALLOC_MINALIGN is
> > already aligned with the size what you need.
>
> With this series, ARCH_KMALLOC_MINALIGN is no longer safe for
> non-coherent DMA on all arm64 SoCs, that's what ARCH_DMA_MINALIGN will
> cover.
>
> Now, looking at the comment for CRYPTO_MINALIGN, one aspect it covers is
> the minimum alignment required by C for the crypto_tfm structure access.
> So a smaller ARCH_KMALLOC_MINALIGN would do. But the other part of the
> comment mentions in-structure alignment for non-coherent DMA. Here we'd
> need the upper bound alignment, ARCH_DMA_MINALIGN.
>
> I'll follow up on Herbert's email as I think he has a good point on
> structure vs kmalloc() alignment.

Got it. Now I know what you want to do. You want to set
ARCH_KMALLOC_MINALIGN to 64, however, the smallest
size of kmem_cache depends on the cache line size at
runtime.  But we have to know the safe alignment at building
time.  So we have to make those align with ARCH_DMA_MINALIGN.
Right?  I think you are on the right road since most CPUs have
a 64-byte cache line.

Thanks.