linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v1 2/2] dma: Add IOMMU static calls with clear default ops

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20240717095330.GH5630@unreal>
Date: Wed, 17 Jul 2024 12:53:30 +0300
From: Leon Romanovsky <leon@...nel.org>
To: Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>
Cc: Robin Murphy <robin.murphy@....com>, Joerg Roedel <joro@...tes.org>,
	Will Deacon <will@...nel.org>,
	Marek Szyprowski <m.szyprowski@...sung.com>,
	Easwar Hariharan <eahariha@...ux.microsoft.com>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, iommu@...ts.linux.dev,
	Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@...dia.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v1 2/2] dma: Add IOMMU static calls with clear default ops

On Wed, Jul 17, 2024 at 10:56:52AM +0200, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 17, 2024 at 11:47:13AM +0300, Leon Romanovsky wrote:
> > It will cause to the situation where "struct device" memory footprint
> > will increase, while we still need to keep dma_ops for archs that don't
> > want to use default IOMMU.
> 
> It won't.  Even with the new bit we still have 28 more spare bits next
> to it :)
> 
> > Because dma_ops pointer exists anyway and has already specific flags. I
> > decided to take evolutive approach and add a new flag to it, instead of
> > revolutionary approach and add a new field to struct device.
> 
> The point is that with a little more work we can actually kill that
> for common configuration.  For non-Xen setups that basically just means
> removing the dummy ops, so it's a pretty big quick win.

No problem, I'll do it.

Thanks