linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v3 2/2] iommu/arm-smmu-v3: Replace vsmmu_size/type with get_viommu

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: <aIPDJyuSVpqMV8sn@google.com>
Date: Fri, 25 Jul 2025 17:47:19 +0000
From: Pranjal Shrivastava <praan@...gle.com>
To: Nicolin Chen <nicolinc@...dia.com>
Cc: jgg@...dia.com, will@...nel.org, joro@...tes.org, robin.murphy@....com,
	linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, iommu@...ts.linux.dev,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-tegra@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 2/2] iommu/arm-smmu-v3: Replace vsmmu_size/type with
 get_viommu_size

On Fri, Jul 25, 2025 at 09:03:39AM -0700, Nicolin Chen wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 25, 2025 at 05:11:07AM +0000, Pranjal Shrivastava wrote:
> > On Thu, Jul 24, 2025 at 02:49:28PM -0700, Nicolin Chen wrote:
> > I'm agreeing with all of it, it's just that the comment says something 
> > was rejected in by the size op, which raises confusion as to why we're
> > in the init op. The init op rejecting something due to data corruption
> > is a different thing..
> > 
> > I totally get the point about data corruption, i.e.:
> > 
> > size op -> returned something valid
> > <data corruption>
> > init op -> rejecting corrupted type
> > 
> > Wheras I was just trying to understand a case where as per the comment:
> > "Unsupported type was rejected in tegra241_cmdqv_get_vintf_size()", 
> > i.e. ->size op returned 0, yet we ended up calling the init op
> 
> Is the updated one in v4 fine to you?
> 
> /*
>  * Unsupported type should be rejected by tegra241_cmdqv_get_vintf_size.
>  * Seeing one here indicates a kernel bug or some data corruption.
>  */

Yes, v4 looks fine.. but I was just trying to understand if the comment
was wrong, didn't necessarily need a re-spin just for that comment :)
Thanks for accommodating it though.

> 
> Nicolin