linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 06/11] x86: drop SWIOTLB and PHYS_ADDR_T

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: <CAHp75VcQcDD3gbfc6UzH3wYgge6EqSBEyWWOQ_dTkz8Eo+XgFw@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 4 Dec 2024 20:41:36 +0200
From: Andy Shevchenko <andy.shevchenko@...il.com>
To: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...nel.org>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, x86@...nel.org, 
	Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>, Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>, 
	Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>, Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com>, 
	"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>, Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>, 
	Andy Shevchenko <andy@...nel.org>, Matthew Wilcox <willy@...radead.org>, 
	Sean Christopherson <seanjc@...gle.com>, Davide Ciminaghi <ciminaghi@...dd.com>, 
	Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@...hat.com>, kvm@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 06/11] x86: drop SWIOTLB and PHYS_ADDR_T_64BIT for PAE

On Wed, Dec 4, 2024 at 12:31 PM Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...nel.org> wrote:
>
> From: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>
>
> Since kernels with and without CONFIG_X86_PAE are now limited
> to the low 4GB of physical address space, there is no need to
> use either swiotlb or 64-bit phys_addr_t any more, so stop
> selecting these and fix up the build warnings from that.

...

>         mtrr_type_lookup(addr, addr + PMD_SIZE, &uniform);
>         if (!uniform) {
>                 pr_warn_once("%s: Cannot satisfy [mem %#010llx-%#010llx] with a huge-page mapping due to MTRR override.\n",
> -                            __func__, addr, addr + PMD_SIZE);
> +                            __func__, (u64)addr, (u64)addr + PMD_SIZE);

Instead of castings I would rather:
1) have addr and size (? does above have off-by-one error?) or end;
2) use struct resource / range with the respective %p[Rr][a] specifier
or use %pa.



-- 
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko