netdev - Re: [PATCH net-next v6 1/6] page_pool: frag API support for 32-bit arch with 64-bit DMA

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: <06e89203-9eaf-99eb-99de-e5209819b8b3@huawei.com>
Date: Wed, 16 Aug 2023 20:49:19 +0800
From: Yunsheng Lin <linyunsheng@...wei.com>
To: Ilias Apalodimas <ilias.apalodimas@...aro.org>
CC: <davem@...emloft.net>, <kuba@...nel.org>, <pabeni@...hat.com>,
	<netdev@...r.kernel.org>, <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, Lorenzo Bianconi
	<lorenzo@...nel.org>, Alexander Duyck <alexander.duyck@...il.com>, Liang Chen
	<liangchen.linux@...il.com>, Alexander Lobakin
	<aleksander.lobakin@...el.com>, Saeed Mahameed <saeedm@...dia.com>, Leon
 Romanovsky <leon@...nel.org>, Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>, Jesper
 Dangaard Brouer <hawk@...nel.org>, <linux-rdma@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next v6 1/6] page_pool: frag API support for 32-bit
 arch with 64-bit DMA

On 2023/8/16 19:26, Ilias Apalodimas wrote:
> Hi Yunsheng
> 
> On Mon, 14 Aug 2023 at 15:59, Yunsheng Lin <linyunsheng@...wei.com> wrote:
>>
>> Currently page_pool_alloc_frag() is not supported in 32-bit
>> arch with 64-bit DMA because of the overlap issue between
>> pp_frag_count and dma_addr_upper in 'struct page' for those
>> arches, which seems to be quite common, see [1], which means
>> driver may need to handle it when using frag API.
> 
> That wasn't so common. IIRC it was a single TI platform that was breaking?

I am not so sure about that as grepping 'ARM_LPAE' has a long
list for that.

> 
>>
>> In order to simplify the driver's work when using frag API
>> this patch allows page_pool_alloc_frag() to call
>> page_pool_alloc_pages() to return pages for those arches.
> 
> Do we have any use cases of people needing this?  Those architectures
> should be long dead and although we have to support them in the
> kernel,  I don't personally see the advantage of adjusting the API to
> do that.  Right now we have a very clear separation between allocating
> pages or fragments.   Why should we hide a page allocation under a
> frag allocation?  A driver writer can simply allocate pages for those
> boards.  Am I the only one not seeing a clean win here?

It is also a part of removing the per page_pool PP_FLAG_PAGE_FRAG flag
in this patchset.

> 
> Thanks
> /Ilias
>