linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v5 0/5] DMA mapping changes for SCSI core

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: <a415e4a1-72ce-53e1-437a-fc7e56e4b913@huawei.com>
Date:   Mon, 11 Jul 2022 08:36:53 +0100
From:   John Garry <john.garry@...wei.com>
To:     Damien Le Moal <damien.lemoal@...nsource.wdc.com>,
        "Martin K. Petersen" <martin.petersen@...cle.com>,
        Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>
CC:     <joro@...tes.org>, <will@...nel.org>, <jejb@...ux.ibm.com>,
        <m.szyprowski@...sung.com>, <robin.murphy@....com>,
        <linux-doc@...r.kernel.org>, <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        <linux-ide@...r.kernel.org>, <iommu@...ts.linux-foundation.org>,
        <iommu@...ts.linux.dev>, <linux-scsi@...r.kernel.org>,
        <linuxarm@...wei.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 0/5] DMA mapping changes for SCSI core

On 11/07/2022 00:08, Damien Le Moal wrote:
>> Ah, I think that I misunderstood Damien's question. I thought he was
>> asking why not keep shost max_sectors at dma_max_mapping_size() and then
>> init each sdev request queue max hw sectors at dma_opt_mapping_size().
> I was suggesting the reverse:)  Keep the device hard limit
> (max_hw_sectors) to the max dma mapping and set the soft limit
> (max_sectors) to the optimal dma mapping size.

Sure, but as I mentioned below, I only see a small % of requests whose 
mapping size exceeds max_sectors but that still causes a big performance 
hit. So that is why I want to set the hard limit as the optimal dma 
mapping size.

Indeed, the IOMMU IOVA caching limit is already the same as default 
max_sectors for the disks in my system - 128Kb for 4k page size.

> 
>> But he seems that you want to know why not have the request queue max
>> sectors at dma_opt_mapping_size(). The answer is related to meaning of
>> dma_opt_mapping_size(). If we get any mappings which exceed this size
>> then it can have a big dma mapping performance hit. So I set max hw
>> sectors at this ‘opt’ mapping size to ensure that we get no mappings
>> which exceed this size. Indeed, I think max sectors is 128Kb today for
>> my host, which would be same as dma_opt_mapping_size() value with an
>> IOMMU enabled. And I find that only a small % of request size may exceed
>> this 128kb size, but it still has a big performance impact.
>>

Thanks,
John