[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <d23c9af4-4a79-4300-891a-fba3ea9cbb1c@suse.com>
Date: Mon, 16 Sep 2024 08:50:58 +0200
From: Jan Beulich <jbeulich@...e.com>
To: Juergen Gross <jgross@...e.com>
Cc: Stefano Stabellini <sstabellini@...nel.org>,
Oleksandr Tyshchenko <oleksandr_tyshchenko@...m.com>,
xen-devel@...ts.xenproject.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
iommu@...ts.linux.dev
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/2] xen/swiotlb: add alignment check for dma buffers
On 16.09.2024 08:47, Juergen Gross wrote:
> --- a/drivers/xen/swiotlb-xen.c
> +++ b/drivers/xen/swiotlb-xen.c
> @@ -78,9 +78,15 @@ static inline int range_straddles_page_boundary(phys_addr_t p, size_t size)
> {
> unsigned long next_bfn, xen_pfn = XEN_PFN_DOWN(p);
> unsigned int i, nr_pages = XEN_PFN_UP(xen_offset_in_page(p) + size);
> + phys_addr_t algn = 1ULL << (get_order(size) + PAGE_SHIFT);
>
> next_bfn = pfn_to_bfn(xen_pfn);
>
> + /* If buffer is physically aligned, ensure DMA alignment. */
> + if (IS_ALIGNED(p, algn) &&
> + !IS_ALIGNED(next_bfn << XEN_PAGE_SHIFT, algn))
And this shift is not at risk of losing bits on Arm LPAE?
Jan
Powered by blists - more mailing lists