linux-kernel - RE: [PATCH 1/2] swiotlb: Remove alloc_size argument to swiotlb_tbl_map

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:
 <SN6PR02MB4157C8206FE193B2C5B2A93FD4092@SN6PR02MB4157.namprd02.prod.outlook.com>
Date: Mon, 15 Apr 2024 12:23:22 +0000
From: Michael Kelley <mhklinux@...look.com>
To: Petr Tesařík <petr@...arici.cz>,
	"mhkelley58@...il.com" <mhkelley58@...il.com>
CC: "robin.murphy@....com" <robin.murphy@....com>, "joro@...tes.org"
	<joro@...tes.org>, "will@...nel.org" <will@...nel.org>, "jgross@...e.com"
	<jgross@...e.com>, "sstabellini@...nel.org" <sstabellini@...nel.org>,
	"oleksandr_tyshchenko@...m.com" <oleksandr_tyshchenko@...m.com>, "hch@....de"
	<hch@....de>, "m.szyprowski@...sung.com" <m.szyprowski@...sung.com>,
	"iommu@...ts.linux.dev" <iommu@...ts.linux.dev>,
	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	"xen-devel@...ts.xenproject.org" <xen-devel@...ts.xenproject.org>,
	"roberto.sassu@...weicloud.com" <roberto.sassu@...weicloud.com>
Subject: RE: [PATCH 1/2] swiotlb: Remove alloc_size argument to
 swiotlb_tbl_map_single()

From: Petr Tesařík <petr@...arici.cz> Sent: Monday, April 15, 2024 4:46 AM
> 
> Hi Michael,
> 
> sorry for taking so long to answer. Yes, there was no agreement on the
> removal of the "dir" parameter, but I'm not sure it's because of
> symmetry with swiotlb_sync_*(), because the topic was not really
> discussed.
> 
> The discussion was about the KUnit test suite and whether direction is
> a property of the bounce buffer or of each sync operation. Since DMA API
> defines associates each DMA buffer with a direction, the direction
> parameter passed to swiotlb_sync_*() should match what was passed to
> swiotlb_tbl_map_single(), because that's how it is used by the generic
> DMA code. In other words, if the parameter is kept, it should be kept
> to match dma_map_*().
> 
> However, there is also symmetry with swiotlb_tbl_unmap_single(). This
> function does use the parameter for the final sync. I believe there
> should be a matching initial sync in swiotlb_tbl_map_single(). In
> short, the buffer sync for DMA non-coherent devices should be moved from
> swiotlb_map() to swiotlb_tbl_map_single(). If this sync is not needed,
> then the caller can (and should) include DMA_ATTR_SKIP_CPU_SYNC in
> the flags parameter.
> 
> To sum it up:
> 
> * Do *NOT* remove the "dir" parameter.
> * Let me send a patch which moves the initial buffer sync.
> 

I'm not seeing the need to move the initial buffer sync.  All
callers of swiotlb_tbl_map_single() already have a subsequent
check for a non-coherent device, and a call to 
arch_sync_dma_for_device().  And the Xen code has some 
special handling that probably shouldn't go in
swiotlb_tbl_map_single().  Or am I missing something?

Michael