[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <aR0J8zHtfe/j4ajU@Asurada-Nvidia>
Date: Tue, 18 Nov 2025 16:06:11 -0800
From: Nicolin Chen <nicolinc@...dia.com>
To: Leon Romanovsky <leon@...nel.org>
CC: Bjorn Helgaas <bhelgaas@...gle.com>, Logan Gunthorpe
<logang@...tatee.com>, Jens Axboe <axboe@...nel.dk>, Robin Murphy
<robin.murphy@....com>, Joerg Roedel <joro@...tes.org>, Will Deacon
<will@...nel.org>, Marek Szyprowski <m.szyprowski@...sung.com>, "Jason
Gunthorpe" <jgg@...pe.ca>, Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
"Jonathan Corbet" <corbet@....net>, Sumit Semwal <sumit.semwal@...aro.org>,
Christian König <christian.koenig@....com>, Kees Cook
<kees@...nel.org>, "Gustavo A. R. Silva" <gustavoars@...nel.org>, "Ankit
Agrawal" <ankita@...dia.com>, Yishai Hadas <yishaih@...dia.com>, "Shameer
Kolothum" <skolothumtho@...dia.com>, Kevin Tian <kevin.tian@...el.com>, "Alex
Williamson" <alex@...zbot.org>, Krishnakant Jaju <kjaju@...dia.com>, Matt
Ochs <mochs@...dia.com>, <linux-pci@...r.kernel.org>,
<linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, <linux-block@...r.kernel.org>,
<iommu@...ts.linux.dev>, <linux-mm@...ck.org>, <linux-doc@...r.kernel.org>,
<linux-media@...r.kernel.org>, <dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org>,
<linaro-mm-sig@...ts.linaro.org>, <kvm@...r.kernel.org>,
<linux-hardening@...r.kernel.org>, Alex Mastro <amastro@...com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v8 06/11] dma-buf: provide phys_vec to scatter-gather
mapping routine
On Tue, Nov 11, 2025 at 11:57:48AM +0200, Leon Romanovsky wrote:
> From: Leon Romanovsky <leonro@...dia.com>
>
> Add dma_buf_map() and dma_buf_unmap() helpers to convert an array of
> MMIO physical address ranges into scatter-gather tables with proper
> DMA mapping.
>
> These common functions are a starting point and support any PCI
> drivers creating mappings from their BAR's MMIO addresses. VFIO is one
> case, as shortly will be RDMA. We can review existing DRM drivers to
> refactor them separately. We hope this will evolve into routines to
> help common DRM that include mixed CPU and MMIO mappings.
>
> Compared to the dma_map_resource() abuse this implementation handles
> the complicated PCI P2P scenarios properly, especially when an IOMMU
> is enabled:
>
> - Direct bus address mapping without IOVA allocation for
> PCI_P2PDMA_MAP_BUS_ADDR, using pci_p2pdma_bus_addr_map(). This
> happens if the IOMMU is enabled but the PCIe switch ACS flags allow
> transactions to avoid the host bridge.
>
> Further, this handles the slightly obscure, case of MMIO with a
> phys_addr_t that is different from the physical BAR programming
> (bus offset). The phys_addr_t is converted to a dma_addr_t and
> accommodates this effect. This enables certain real systems to
> work, especially on ARM platforms.
>
> - Mapping through host bridge with IOVA allocation and DMA_ATTR_MMIO
> attribute for MMIO memory regions (PCI_P2PDMA_MAP_THRU_HOST_BRIDGE).
> This happens when the IOMMU is enabled and the ACS flags are forcing
> all traffic to the IOMMU - ie for virtualization systems.
>
> - Cases where P2P is not supported through the host bridge/CPU. The
> P2P subsystem is the proper place to detect this and block it.
>
> Helper functions fill_sg_entry() and calc_sg_nents() handle the
> scatter-gather table construction, splitting large regions into
> UINT_MAX-sized chunks to fit within sg->length field limits.
>
> Since the physical address based DMA API forbids use of the CPU list
> of the scatterlist this will produce a mangled scatterlist that has
> a fully zero-length and NULL'd CPU list. The list is 0 length,
> all the struct page pointers are NULL and zero sized. This is stronger
> and more robust than the existing mangle_sg_table() technique. It is
> a future project to migrate DMABUF as a subsystem away from using
> scatterlist for this data structure.
>
> Tested-by: Alex Mastro <amastro@...com>
> Tested-by: Nicolin Chen <nicolinc@...dia.com>
> Signed-off-by: Leon Romanovsky <leonro@...dia.com>
Reviewed-by: Nicolin Chen <nicolinc@...dia.com>
With a nit:
> +err_unmap_dma:
> + if (!i || !dma->state) {
> + ; /* Do nothing */
> + } else if (dma_use_iova(dma->state)) {
> + dma_iova_destroy(attach->dev, dma->state, mapped_len, dir,
> + DMA_ATTR_MMIO);
> + } else {
> + for_each_sgtable_dma_sg(&dma->sgt, sgl, i)
> + dma_unmap_phys(attach->dev, sg_dma_address(sgl),
> + sg_dma_len(sgl), dir, DMA_ATTR_MMIO);
Would it be safer to skip dma_unmap_phys() the range [i, nents)?
Powered by blists - more mailing lists