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, 11 Aug 2022 09:34:54 +0200
From:   Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>
To:     Michal Hocko <mhocko@...e.com>
Cc:     Baoquan He <bhe@...hat.com>, Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
        John Donnelly <john.p.donnelly@...cle.com>,
        David Hildenbrand <david@...hat.com>, linux-mm@...ck.org,
        LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] dma/pool: do not complain if DMA pool is not allocated

On Fri, Aug 05, 2022 at 07:37:16PM +0200, Michal Hocko wrote:
> GFP_DMA is a misnomer. It doesn't really say that the allocation should
> be done for actual DMA. GFP_DMA really says allocate from ZONE_DMA.

Yes.  But in practice that either is to do DMA of some form, including
the s390 variant not using the dma api, or completely stupid cargo
cult code.

> It
> is my understanding that all actual DMA users should use a dedicated dma
> allocation APIs which should do the right thing wrt. address constrains.

Yes.  And we were at a point where we got to that, but it seems somewhat
recently a lot of people added completely stupid GFP_DMA kmallocs in the
all over the crypto drivers.  Sigh...

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ