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: <99c874f1-3d85-43b2-a3a0-40e1e0c25696@ti.com>
Date: Thu, 29 Aug 2024 11:47:25 +0530
From: Beleswar Prasad Padhi <b-padhi@...com>
To: Mathieu Poirier <mathieu.poirier@...aro.org>,
        Lu Baolu
	<baolu.lu@...ux.intel.com>, <andersson@...nel.org>,
        <afd@...com>, <nm@...com>, <hnagalla@...com>
CC: 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 All,

On 22/08/24 21:47, Mathieu Poirier wrote:
> 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".


Just a heads-up. Currently, I am seeing boot failures while booting 
remotecores in TI's IOMMU devices with mainline kernel. Working on the 
the fix, once it is done, will apply the above patch and test it ASAP.

Thanks,
Beleswar

>
> 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
> > 
>