linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v9 7/7] iommu/arm-smmu-v3: Perform per-domain invalidations using arm_smmu

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <aXO0SKsi/k8slP/B@Asurada-Nvidia>
Date: Fri, 23 Jan 2026 09:47:52 -0800
From: Nicolin Chen <nicolinc@...dia.com>
To: Will Deacon <will@...nel.org>
CC: <jean-philippe@...aro.org>, <robin.murphy@....com>, <joro@...tes.org>,
	<jgg@...dia.com>, <balbirs@...dia.com>, <miko.lenczewski@....com>,
	<peterz@...radead.org>, <kevin.tian@...el.com>, <praan@...gle.com>,
	<linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>, <iommu@...ts.linux.dev>,
	<linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v9 7/7] iommu/arm-smmu-v3: Perform per-domain
 invalidations using arm_smmu_invs

On Fri, Jan 23, 2026 at 05:07:15PM +0000, Will Deacon wrote:
> On Fri, Dec 19, 2025 at 12:11:29PM -0800, Nicolin Chen wrote:
> > Replace the old invalidation functions with arm_smmu_domain_inv_range() in
> > all the existing invalidation routines. And deprecate the old functions.
> > 
> > The new arm_smmu_domain_inv_range() handles the CMDQ_MAX_TLBI_OPS as well,
> > so drop it in the SVA function.
> > 
> > Since arm_smmu_cmdq_batch_add_range() has only one caller now, and it must
> > be given a valid size, add a WARN_ON_ONCE to catch any missed case.
> > 
> > Reviewed-by: Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@...dia.com>
> > Signed-off-by: Nicolin Chen <nicolinc@...dia.com>
> > ---
> >  drivers/iommu/arm/arm-smmu-v3/arm-smmu-v3.h   |   7 -
> >  .../iommu/arm/arm-smmu-v3/arm-smmu-v3-sva.c   |  29 +--
> >  drivers/iommu/arm/arm-smmu-v3/arm-smmu-v3.c   | 165 +-----------------
> >  3 files changed, 11 insertions(+), 190 deletions(-)
> 
> It's one thing replacing the invalidation implementation but I think you
> need to update some of the old ordering comments, too. In particular,
> the old code relies on the dma_wmb() during cmdq insertion to order
> updates to in-memory structures, which includes the pgtable in non-strict
> mode.
> 
> I don't think any of that is true now?

OK. I'll update those ordering comments. Combining your latest
suggestion of using dma_mb() v.s. smp_mb(). I assume this will
be just doing s/dma_wmb/dma_mb in those comments.

Nicolin