netdev - Re: [PATCH V3 1/5] Swiotlb: Add Swiotlb bounce buffer remap function for HV IVM

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: <59e41c28-260f-876d-c7cf-a13669ad8984@gmail.com>
Date:   Sat, 4 Dec 2021 15:21:50 +0800
From:   Tianyu Lan <ltykernel@...il.com>
To:     Tom Lendacky <thomas.lendacky@....com>, kys@...rosoft.com,
        haiyangz@...rosoft.com, sthemmin@...rosoft.com, wei.liu@...nel.org,
        decui@...rosoft.com, tglx@...utronix.de, mingo@...hat.com,
        bp@...en8.de, dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com, x86@...nel.org,
        hpa@...or.com, jgross@...e.com, sstabellini@...nel.org,
        boris.ostrovsky@...cle.com, joro@...tes.org, will@...nel.org,
        davem@...emloft.net, kuba@...nel.org, jejb@...ux.ibm.com,
        martin.petersen@...cle.com, arnd@...db.de, hch@...radead.org,
        m.szyprowski@...sung.com, robin.murphy@....com,
        Tianyu.Lan@...rosoft.com, xen-devel@...ts.xenproject.org,
        michael.h.kelley@...rosoft.com
Cc:     iommu@...ts.linux-foundation.org, linux-arch@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-hyperv@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-scsi@...r.kernel.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
        vkuznets@...hat.com, brijesh.singh@....com, konrad.wilk@...cle.com,
        hch@....de, parri.andrea@...il.com, dave.hansen@...el.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH V3 1/5] Swiotlb: Add Swiotlb bounce buffer remap function
 for HV IVM

On 12/4/2021 4:06 AM, Tom Lendacky wrote:
>>> Hi Tom:
>>>        Thanks for your test. Could you help to test the following 
>>> patch and check whether it can fix the issue.
>>
>> The patch is mangled. Is the only difference where 
>> set_memory_decrypted() is called?
> 
> I de-mangled the patch. No more stack traces with SME active.
> 
> Thanks,
> Tom

Hi Tom:
	Thanks a lot for your rework and test. I will update in the next version.

Thanks.