linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] mmc: sdhci-xenon: Fix 2G limitation on AC5 SoC

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:   Sat, 20 Aug 2022 23:17:44 -0700
From:   Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>
To:     Vadym Kochan <vadym.kochan@...ision.eu>
Cc:     Robin Murphy <robin.murphy@....com>,
        Adrian Hunter <adrian.hunter@...el.com>,
        Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>,
        Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@...il.com>,
        Hu Ziji <huziji@...vell.com>,
        Ulf Hansson <ulf.hansson@...aro.org>,
        linux-mmc@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        Elad Nachman <enachman@...vell.com>, iommu@...ts.linux.dev,
        Mickey Rachamim <mickeyr@...vell.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] mmc: sdhci-xenon: Fix 2G limitation on AC5 SoC

On Thu, Aug 18, 2022 at 03:07:40PM +0300, Vadym Kochan wrote:
> It works with the following changes:
> 
>     #1 dma-ranges = <0x0 0x0 0x2 0x0 0x0 0x80000000>;
> 
>     #3 swiotlb="force"
> 
> Is it OK to force the memory allocation from the start for the swiotlb ?

It should be ok, but isn't really optimal.

I wonder if we should just allow DT to specify the swiotlb buffer
location.  Basically have yet another RESERVEDMEM_OF_DECLARE variant
for it, which shouldn't be all that much work except for figuring
out the interaction with the various kernel command line options.