linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v4 2/4] s390/pci: store DMA offset in bus_dma

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: <8380fe8052c9b972a8350394cb6655f6a9683d29.camel@linux.ibm.com>
Date: Fri, 07 Feb 2025 23:04:59 +0100
From: Niklas Schnelle <schnelle@...ux.ibm.com>
To: Matthew Rosato <mjrosato@...ux.ibm.com>, joro@...tes.org, will@...nel.org,
        robin.murphy@....com, gerald.schaefer@...ux.ibm.com
Cc: hca@...ux.ibm.com, gor@...ux.ibm.com, agordeev@...ux.ibm.com,
        svens@...ux.ibm.com, borntraeger@...ux.ibm.com, farman@...ux.ibm.com,
        clegoate@...hat.com, jgg@...dia.com, iommu@...ts.linux.dev,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-s390@...r.kernel.org,
        Halil Pasic
	 <pasic@...ux.ibm.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 2/4] s390/pci: store DMA offset in bus_dma_region

On Fri, 2025-02-07 at 15:53 -0500, Matthew Rosato wrote:
> PCI devices on s390 have a DMA offset that is reported via CLP.  In
> preparation for allowing identity domains, setup the bus_dma_region
> for all PCI devices using the reported CLP value.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Matthew Rosato <mjrosato@...ux.ibm.com>
> ---
>  arch/s390/pci/pci_bus.c | 18 ++++++++++++++++++
>  1 file changed, 18 insertions(+)
> 
> diff --git a/arch/s390/pci/pci_bus.c b/arch/s390/pci/pci_bus.c
> index 857afbc4828f..b5c35b8e47a4 100644
> --- a/arch/s390/pci/pci_bus.c
> +++ b/arch/s390/pci/pci_bus.c
> @@ -19,6 +19,7 @@
>  #include <linux/jump_label.h>
>  #include <linux/pci.h>
>  #include <linux/printk.h>
> +#include <linux/dma-direct.h>
>  
>  #include <asm/pci_clp.h>
>  #include <asm/pci_dma.h>
> @@ -283,10 +284,27 @@ static struct zpci_bus *zpci_bus_alloc(int topo, bool topo_is_tid)
>  	return zbus;
>  }
>  
> +static void pci_dma_range_setup(struct pci_dev *pdev)
> +{
> +	struct zpci_dev *zdev = to_zpci(pdev);
> +	struct bus_dma_region *map;
> +
> +	map = kzalloc(sizeof(*map), GFP_KERNEL);
> +	if (!map)
> +		return;
> +
> +	map->cpu_start = 0;
> +	map->dma_start = PAGE_ALIGN(zdev->start_dma);
> +	map->size = max(PAGE_ALIGN_DOWN(zdev->end_dma + 1) - map->dma_start, 0);

Ugh, this is my fault as I suggested it, but this max() doesn't work
here. The zdev->end_dma is unsigned and so is map->dma_start so if the
former is smaller underflow will occur and the max() won't save us.
It's largely a theoretical issue since zdev->end_dma + 1 should always
be larger than zdev->start_dma, but now the max() looks like we thought
of that, but then it doesn't work.

If we handle it maybe just go with:

aligned_end = PAGE_ALIGN_DOWN(zdev->end_dma + 1);
if (aligned_end >= map->dma_start)
     map->size = aligned_end - map->dma_start;
else
     map->size = 0;


> +	pdev->dev.dma_range_map = map;
> +}
> +
>  void pcibios_bus_add_device(struct pci_dev *pdev)
>  {
>  	struct zpci_dev *zdev = to_zpci(pdev);
>  
> +	pci_dma_range_setup(pdev);
> +
>  	/*
>  	 * With pdev->no_vf_scan the common PCI probing code does not
>  	 * perform PF/VF linking.