From: Thiago Jung Bauermann <bauerman@linux.ibm.com>
To: x86@kernel.org
Cc: iommu@lists.linux-foundation.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org,
linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org, linux-s390@vger.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>, Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de>,
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>, Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>,
Marek Szyprowski <m.szyprowski@samsung.com>,
Robin Murphy <robin.murphy@arm.com>,
Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk <konrad.wilk@oracle.com>,
Alexey Dobriyan <adobriyan@gmail.com>,
Thomas Lendacky <Thomas.Lendacky@amd.com>,
Halil Pasic <pasic@linux.ibm.com>,
Mike Anderson <andmike@linux.ibm.com>,
Ram Pai <linuxram@us.ibm.com>,
Thiago Jung Bauermann <bauerman@linux.ibm.com>
Subject: [PATCH 2/3] DMA mapping: Move SME handling to x86-specific files
Date: Sat, 13 Jul 2019 01:45:53 -0300 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20190713044554.28719-3-bauerman@linux.ibm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20190713044554.28719-1-bauerman@linux.ibm.com>
Secure Memory Encryption is an x86-specific feature, so it shouldn't appear
in generic kernel code.
In DMA mapping code, Christoph Hellwig mentioned that "There is no reason
why we should have a special debug printk just for one specific reason why
there is a requirement for a large DMA mask.", so we just remove
dma_check_mask().
In SWIOTLB code, there's no need to mention which memory encryption feature
is active, so just use a more generic warning. Besides, other architectures
will have different names for similar technology.
Signed-off-by: Thiago Jung Bauermann <bauerman@linux.ibm.com>
---
arch/s390/include/asm/mem_encrypt.h | 4 +---
arch/x86/include/asm/mem_encrypt.h | 10 ++++++++++
include/linux/mem_encrypt.h | 14 +-------------
kernel/dma/mapping.c | 8 --------
kernel/dma/swiotlb.c | 3 +--
5 files changed, 13 insertions(+), 26 deletions(-)
diff --git a/arch/s390/include/asm/mem_encrypt.h b/arch/s390/include/asm/mem_encrypt.h
index 3eb018508190..ff813a56bc30 100644
--- a/arch/s390/include/asm/mem_encrypt.h
+++ b/arch/s390/include/asm/mem_encrypt.h
@@ -4,9 +4,7 @@
#ifndef __ASSEMBLY__
-#define sme_me_mask 0ULL
-
-static inline bool sme_active(void) { return false; }
+static inline bool mem_encrypt_active(void) { return false; }
extern bool sev_active(void);
int set_memory_encrypted(unsigned long addr, int numpages);
diff --git a/arch/x86/include/asm/mem_encrypt.h b/arch/x86/include/asm/mem_encrypt.h
index 0c196c47d621..848ce43b9040 100644
--- a/arch/x86/include/asm/mem_encrypt.h
+++ b/arch/x86/include/asm/mem_encrypt.h
@@ -92,6 +92,16 @@ early_set_memory_encrypted(unsigned long vaddr, unsigned long size) { return 0;
extern char __start_bss_decrypted[], __end_bss_decrypted[], __start_bss_decrypted_unused[];
+static inline bool mem_encrypt_active(void)
+{
+ return sme_me_mask;
+}
+
+static inline u64 sme_get_me_mask(void)
+{
+ return sme_me_mask;
+}
+
#endif /* __ASSEMBLY__ */
#endif /* __X86_MEM_ENCRYPT_H__ */
diff --git a/include/linux/mem_encrypt.h b/include/linux/mem_encrypt.h
index 470bd53a89df..0c5b0ff9eb29 100644
--- a/include/linux/mem_encrypt.h
+++ b/include/linux/mem_encrypt.h
@@ -18,23 +18,11 @@
#else /* !CONFIG_ARCH_HAS_MEM_ENCRYPT */
-#define sme_me_mask 0ULL
-
-static inline bool sme_active(void) { return false; }
+static inline bool mem_encrypt_active(void) { return false; }
static inline bool sev_active(void) { return false; }
#endif /* CONFIG_ARCH_HAS_MEM_ENCRYPT */
-static inline bool mem_encrypt_active(void)
-{
- return sme_me_mask;
-}
-
-static inline u64 sme_get_me_mask(void)
-{
- return sme_me_mask;
-}
-
#ifdef CONFIG_AMD_MEM_ENCRYPT
/*
* The __sme_set() and __sme_clr() macros are useful for adding or removing
diff --git a/kernel/dma/mapping.c b/kernel/dma/mapping.c
index f7afdadb6770..b53fc7ec4914 100644
--- a/kernel/dma/mapping.c
+++ b/kernel/dma/mapping.c
@@ -291,12 +291,6 @@ void dma_free_attrs(struct device *dev, size_t size, void *cpu_addr,
}
EXPORT_SYMBOL(dma_free_attrs);
-static inline void dma_check_mask(struct device *dev, u64 mask)
-{
- if (sme_active() && (mask < (((u64)sme_get_me_mask() << 1) - 1)))
- dev_warn(dev, "SME is active, device will require DMA bounce buffers\n");
-}
-
int dma_supported(struct device *dev, u64 mask)
{
const struct dma_map_ops *ops = get_dma_ops(dev);
@@ -321,7 +315,6 @@ int dma_set_mask(struct device *dev, u64 mask)
return -EIO;
arch_dma_set_mask(dev, mask);
- dma_check_mask(dev, mask);
*dev->dma_mask = mask;
return 0;
}
@@ -333,7 +326,6 @@ int dma_set_coherent_mask(struct device *dev, u64 mask)
if (!dma_supported(dev, mask))
return -EIO;
- dma_check_mask(dev, mask);
dev->coherent_dma_mask = mask;
return 0;
}
diff --git a/kernel/dma/swiotlb.c b/kernel/dma/swiotlb.c
index 62fa5a82a065..e52401f94e91 100644
--- a/kernel/dma/swiotlb.c
+++ b/kernel/dma/swiotlb.c
@@ -459,8 +459,7 @@ phys_addr_t swiotlb_tbl_map_single(struct device *hwdev,
panic("Can not allocate SWIOTLB buffer earlier and can't now provide you with the DMA bounce buffer");
if (mem_encrypt_active())
- pr_warn_once("%s is active and system is using DMA bounce buffers\n",
- sme_active() ? "SME" : "SEV");
+ pr_warn_once("Memory encryption is active and system is using DMA bounce buffers\n");
mask = dma_get_seg_boundary(hwdev);
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2019-07-13 4:48 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 16+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2019-07-13 4:45 [PATCH 0/3] Remove x86-specific code from generic headers Thiago Jung Bauermann
2019-07-13 4:45 ` [PATCH 1/3] x86,s390: Move ARCH_HAS_MEM_ENCRYPT definition to arch/Kconfig Thiago Jung Bauermann
2019-07-13 7:27 ` Christoph Hellwig
2019-07-15 15:23 ` [PATCH 1/3] x86, s390: " janani
2019-07-15 20:00 ` Thiago Jung Bauermann
2019-07-13 4:45 ` Thiago Jung Bauermann [this message]
2019-07-13 7:29 ` [PATCH 2/3] DMA mapping: Move SME handling to x86-specific files Christoph Hellwig
2019-07-13 4:45 ` [PATCH 3/3] fs/core/vmcore: Move sev_active() reference to x86 arch code Thiago Jung Bauermann
2019-07-13 5:08 ` [PATCH 0/3] Remove x86-specific code from generic headers Thiago Jung Bauermann
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2019-07-12 5:36 Thiago Jung Bauermann
2019-07-12 5:36 ` [PATCH 2/3] DMA mapping: Move SME handling to x86-specific files Thiago Jung Bauermann
2019-07-12 7:13 ` Christoph Hellwig
2019-07-12 23:42 ` Thiago Jung Bauermann
2019-07-12 16:09 ` Thomas Gleixner
2019-07-18 19:47 ` Thiago Jung Bauermann
2019-07-19 9:05 ` kbuild test robot
2019-07-20 0:22 ` Thiago Jung Bauermann
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20190713044554.28719-3-bauerman@linux.ibm.com \
--to=bauerman@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=Thomas.Lendacky@amd.com \
--cc=adobriyan@gmail.com \
--cc=andmike@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=bp@alien8.de \
--cc=hch@lst.de \
--cc=hpa@zytor.com \
--cc=iommu@lists.linux-foundation.org \
--cc=konrad.wilk@oracle.com \
--cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-s390@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org \
--cc=linuxram@us.ibm.com \
--cc=m.szyprowski@samsung.com \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=pasic@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=robin.murphy@arm.com \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
--cc=x86@kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).