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  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]
Date:   Wed, 30 Dec 2020 14:10:57 +0800
From:   Jason Wang <jasowang@...hat.com>
To:     Yongji Xie <xieyongji@...edance.com>
Cc:     "Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@...hat.com>,
        Stefan Hajnoczi <stefanha@...hat.com>, sgarzare@...hat.com,
        Parav Pandit <parav@...dia.com>, akpm@...ux-foundation.org,
        Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@...radead.org>,
        Matthew Wilcox <willy@...radead.org>, viro@...iv.linux.org.uk,
        axboe@...nel.dk, bcrl@...ck.org, corbet@....net,
        virtualization@...ts.linux-foundation.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
        kvm@...r.kernel.org, linux-aio@...ck.org,
        linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org, linux-mm@...ck.org
Subject: Re: [RFC v2 09/13] vduse: Add support for processing vhost iotlb
 message


On 2020/12/29 下午6:26, Yongji Xie wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 29, 2020 at 5:11 PM Jason Wang <jasowang@...hat.com> wrote:
>>
>>
>> ----- Original Message -----
>>> On Mon, Dec 28, 2020 at 4:43 PM Jason Wang <jasowang@...hat.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> On 2020/12/28 下午4:14, Yongji Xie wrote:
>>>>>> I see. So all the above two questions are because VHOST_IOTLB_INVALIDATE
>>>>>> is expected to be synchronous. This need to be solved by tweaking the
>>>>>> current VDUSE API or we can re-visit to go with descriptors relaying
>>>>>> first.
>>>>>>
>>>>> Actually all vdpa related operations are synchronous in current
>>>>> implementation. The ops.set_map/dma_map/dma_unmap should not return
>>>>> until the VDUSE_UPDATE_IOTLB/VDUSE_INVALIDATE_IOTLB message is replied
>>>>> by userspace. Could it solve this problem?
>>>>
>>>>    I was thinking whether or not we need to generate IOTLB_INVALIDATE
>>>> message to VDUSE during dma_unmap (vduse_dev_unmap_page).
>>>>
>>>> If we don't, we're probably fine.
>>>>
>>> It seems not feasible. This message will be also used in the
>>> virtio-vdpa case to notify userspace to unmap some pages during
>>> consistent dma unmapping. Maybe we can document it to make sure the
>>> users can handle the message correctly.
>> Just to make sure I understand your point.
>>
>> Do you mean you plan to notify the unmap of 1) streaming DMA or 2)
>> coherent DMA?
>>
>> For 1) you probably need a workqueue to do that since dma unmap can
>> be done in irq or bh context. And if usrspace does't do the unmap, it
>> can still access the bounce buffer (if you don't zap pte)?
>>
> I plan to do it in the coherent DMA case.


Any reason for treating coherent DMA differently?


> It's true that userspace can
> access the dma buffer if userspace doesn't do the unmap. But the dma
> pages would not be freed and reused unless user space called munmap()
> for them.


I wonder whether or not we could recycle IOVA in this case to avoid the 
IOTLB_UMAP message.

Thanks


>
> Thanks,
> Yongji
>

Powered by blists - more mailing lists