linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 1/1] remoteproc: Use iommu_paging_domain

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: <ZsdktJEqR9BOgivK@p14s>
Date: Thu, 22 Aug 2024 10:17:56 -0600
From: Mathieu Poirier <mathieu.poirier@...aro.org>
To: Lu Baolu <baolu.lu@...ux.intel.com>, andersson@...nel.org, afd@...com,
	nm@...com, hnagalla@...com, b-padhi@...com
Cc: Bjorn Andersson <andersson@...nel.org>, Joerg Roedel <joro@...tes.org>,
	Will Deacon <will@...nel.org>, Robin Murphy <robin.murphy@....com>,
	Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@...pe.ca>, Kevin Tian <kevin.tian@...el.com>,
	linux-remoteproc@...r.kernel.org, iommu@...ts.linux.dev,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@...dia.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/1] remoteproc: Use iommu_paging_domain_alloc()

Hi Baolu,

Sorry for the late reply, this slipped through the cracks.

On Mon, Aug 12, 2024 at 03:28:11PM +0800, Lu Baolu wrote:
> An iommu domain is allocated in rproc_enable_iommu() and is attached to
> rproc->dev.parent in the same function.
> 
> Use iommu_paging_domain_alloc() to make it explicit.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Lu Baolu <baolu.lu@...ux.intel.com>
> Reviewed-by: Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@...dia.com>
> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20240610085555.88197-13-baolu.lu@linux.intel.com
> ---
>  drivers/remoteproc/remoteproc_core.c | 6 +++---
>  1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/remoteproc/remoteproc_core.c b/drivers/remoteproc/remoteproc_core.c
> index f276956f2c5c..eb66f78ec8b7 100644
> --- a/drivers/remoteproc/remoteproc_core.c
> +++ b/drivers/remoteproc/remoteproc_core.c
> @@ -109,10 +109,10 @@ static int rproc_enable_iommu(struct rproc *rproc)
>  		return 0;
>  	}
>  
> -	domain = iommu_domain_alloc(dev->bus);
> -	if (!domain) {
> +	domain = iommu_paging_domain_alloc(dev);

I'm a little hesitant here.  Function iommu_domain_alloc() passes NULL two the
second argument of __iommu_domain_alloc() while iommu_paging_domain_alloc()
provides a 'dev'.  I don't have any HW to test on and I am not familiar enough
with the IOMMU subsystem to confidently more forward.

I am asking the Qualcomm (Bjorn and friends) and TI crew (Beleswar, Andrew,
Nishanth and Hari) to test this patch on their IOMMU devices and get back to me
with a "Tested-by".

Thanks,
Mathieu

> +	if (IS_ERR(domain)) {
>  		dev_err(dev, "can't alloc iommu domain\n");
> -		return -ENOMEM;
> +		return PTR_ERR(domain);
>  	}
>  
>  	iommu_set_fault_handler(domain, rproc_iommu_fault, rproc);
> -- 
> 2.34.1
>