linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v4 1/2] iommu/s390: Fix race with release

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: <58d14cfc-f8ba-777b-a975-371ff2b29e5a@arm.com>
Date:   Thu, 1 Sep 2022 16:03:36 +0100
From:   Robin Murphy <robin.murphy@....com>
To:     Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@...dia.com>
Cc:     Niklas Schnelle <schnelle@...ux.ibm.com>,
        Pierre Morel <pmorel@...ux.ibm.com>,
        Matthew Rosato <mjrosato@...ux.ibm.com>, iommu@...ts.linux.dev,
        linux-s390@...r.kernel.org, borntraeger@...ux.ibm.com,
        hca@...ux.ibm.com, gor@...ux.ibm.com,
        gerald.schaefer@...ux.ibm.com, agordeev@...ux.ibm.com,
        svens@...ux.ibm.com, joro@...tes.org, will@...nel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 1/2] iommu/s390: Fix race with release_device ops

On 2022-09-01 15:34, Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 01, 2022 at 03:29:16PM +0100, Robin Murphy wrote:
> 
>> Right, the next step would be to bridge that gap to iommu-dma to dump the
>> flush queue when IOVA allocation failure implies we've reached the
>> "rollover" point, and perhaps not use the timer at all. By that point a
>> dedicated domain type, or at least some definite internal flag, for this
>> alternate behaviour seems like the logical way to go.
> 
> At least on this direction, I've been thinking it would be nice to
> replace the domain type _FQ with a flag inside the domain, maybe the
> ops, saying how the domain wants the common DMA API to operate. If it
> wants FQ mode or other tuning parameters

Compare the not-necessarily-obvious matrix of "strict" and "passthrough" 
command-line parameters with the nice understandable kconfig and sysfs 
controls for a reminder of why I moved things *from* that paradigm in 
the first place ;)

This idea still fits perfectly into the the "continuum of strictness" 
notion underlying that domain type rework, since it potentially leaves a 
lot more address space mapped for a much longer time than our current FQ 
implementation. I would agree that exposing FQ tuneables in their own 
right may well have some potential value, much like John's equivalent 
idea for the IOVA cache layer, but I for one have no desire to bring 
back DOMAIN_ATTR_DMA_USE_FLUSH_QUEUE, much less any further mess of 
disjoint properties at that level.

Thanks,
Robin.