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]

Message-ID: <VI1P190MB031779C030CAED8026D53D1895259@VI1P190MB0317.EURP190.PROD.OUTLOOK.COM>
Date:   Thu, 13 Oct 2022 09:40:00 +0300
From:   Vadym Kochan <vadym.kochan@...ision.eu>
To:     Robin Murphy <robin.murphy@....com>,
        Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>
Cc:     Adrian Hunter <adrian.hunter@...el.com>,
        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

Hi Robin,

On Mon, 22 Aug 2022 11:06:43 +0100, Robin Murphy <robin.murphy@....com> wrote:
> On 2022-08-21 07:17, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> > 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.
> 
> We already have all the information we need in the DT (and ACPI), the 
> arm64 init code just needs to do a better job of interpreting it 
> properly. I'll see what I can come up with once I've finished what I'm 
> currently tied up in.
> 
> Thanks,
> Robin.

Sorry to disturb you, I just 'd like to know if you have
some ideas to share or patches to test ?

Thank you!