netdev - RE: [PATCH 3/4] net: qcom/emac: enforce DMA address restrictions

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: <063D6719AE5E284EB5DD2968C1650D6DD0092ADF@AcuExch.aculab.com>
Date:   Thu, 12 Oct 2017 16:20:16 +0000
From:   David Laight <David.Laight@...LAB.COM>
To:     'Timur Tabi' <timur@...eaurora.org>,
        "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
        "netdev@...r.kernel.org" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: RE: [PATCH 3/4] net: qcom/emac: enforce DMA address restrictions

From: Timur Tabi
> Sent: 12 October 2017 15:13
> On 10/12/17 4:30 AM, David Laight wrote:
> > Isn't the memory allocated by a single kzalloc() call?
> 
> dma_alloc_coherenent, actually.
> 
> > IIRC that guarantees it doesn't cross a power or 2 boundary less than
> > the size.
> 
> I'm pretty sure that kzalloc does not make that guarantee, and I don't
> think dma_alloc_coherent does either.

dma_alloc_coherent() definitely does.
And I've a driver that relies on it (for 16k blocks).

	David