netdev - Re: [PATCH 1/8] iommu: Add a gfp parameter to iommu

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]

Date:   Fri, 20 Jan 2023 13:53:40 -0400
From:   Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@...dia.com>
To:     Joerg Roedel <joro@...tes.org>
Cc:     Robin Murphy <robin.murphy@....com>,
        Lu Baolu <baolu.lu@...ux.intel.com>,
        Kevin Tian <kevin.tian@...el.com>,
        Matthew Rosato <mjrosato@...ux.ibm.com>,
        Alex Williamson <alex.williamson@...hat.com>,
        ath10k@...ts.infradead.org, ath11k@...ts.infradead.org,
        Christian Borntraeger <borntraeger@...ux.ibm.com>,
        dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org, iommu@...ts.linux.dev,
        kvm@...r.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
        linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org, linux-media@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-rdma@...r.kernel.org, linux-remoteproc@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-s390@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-stm32@...md-mailman.stormreply.com,
        linux-tegra@...r.kernel.org, linux-wireless@...r.kernel.org,
        netdev@...r.kernel.org, nouveau@...ts.freedesktop.org,
        Niklas Schnelle <schnelle@...ux.ibm.com>,
        virtualization@...ts.linux-foundation.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/8] iommu: Add a gfp parameter to iommu_map()

On Fri, Jan 20, 2023 at 10:24:55AM +0100, Joerg Roedel wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 06, 2023 at 01:24:11PM -0400, Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
> > I think it is just better to follow kernel convention and have
> > allocation functions include the GFP because it is a clear signal to
> > the user that there is an allocation hidden inside the API. The whole
> > point of gfp is not to have multitudes of every function for every
> > allocation mode.
> 
> Well, having GFP parameters is not a strict kernel convention. There are
> places doing it differently and have sleeping and atomic variants of
> APIs. I have to say I like the latter more. But given that this leads to
> an invasion of API functions here which all do the same under the hood, I
> agree it is better to go with a GFP parameter here.

Ok, I think we are done with this series, I'll stick it in linux-next
for a bit and send you a PR so the trees stay in sync

Thanks,
Jason