| 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
| ||
|
Message-Id: <20100228033800N.fujita.tomonori@lab.ntt.co.jp> Date: Sun, 28 Feb 2010 03:38:20 +0900 From: FUJITA Tomonori <fujita.tomonori@....ntt.co.jp> To: hancockrwd@...il.com Cc: davem@...emloft.net, bzolnier@...il.com, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org, linux-usb@...r.kernel.org Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH] fix problems with NETIF_F_HIGHDMA in networking drivers On Sat, 27 Feb 2010 11:59:47 -0600 Robert Hancock <hancockrwd@...il.com> wrote: > On Sat, Feb 27, 2010 at 3:53 AM, David Miller <davem@...emloft.net> wrote: > > From: Robert Hancock <hancockrwd@...il.com> > > Date: Fri, 26 Feb 2010 21:08:04 -0600 > > > >> That seems like a reasonable approach to me. Only question is how to > >> implement the check for DMA_64BIT. Can we just check page_to_phys on > >> each of the pages in the skb to see if it's > 0xffffffff ? Are there > >> any architectures where it's more complicated than that? > > > > On almost every platform it's "more complicated than that". > > > > This is the whole issue. What matters is the final DMA address and > > since we have IOMMUs and the like, it is absolutely not tenable to > > solve this by checking physical address attributes. > > Yeah, physical address isn't quite right. There is a precedent for Probably, you need to check PCI_DMA_BUS_IS_PHYS. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Powered by blists - more mailing lists