From: Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>
To: Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@linux-m68k.org>
Cc: Yoshihiro Shimoda <yoshihiro.shimoda.uh@renesas.com>,
Joerg Roedel <joro@8bytes.org>, Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk>,
Ulf Hansson <ulf.hansson@linaro.org>,
Wolfram Sang <wsa+renesas@sang-engineering.com>,
Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>,
Linux IOMMU <iommu@lists.linux-foundation.org>,
linux-block@vger.kernel.org,
Linux MMC List <linux-mmc@vger.kernel.org>,
Linux-Renesas <linux-renesas-soc@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v6 4/5] mmc: tmio: Use dma_max_mapping_size() instead of a workaround
Date: Fri, 14 Jun 2019 09:18:00 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20190614071800.GB8420@lst.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAMuHMdXYqgPRX1WfUTRsKHhnSok5vfnr4AY36=vXoUvAxcNyWQ@mail.gmail.com>
On Thu, Jun 13, 2019 at 10:35:44PM +0200, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
> I'm always triggered by the use of min_t() and other casts:
> mmc->max_blk_size and mmc->max_blk_count are both unsigned int.
> dma_max_mapping_size() returns size_t, which can be 64-bit.
>
> 1) Can the multiplication overflow?
> Probably not, as per commit 2a55c1eac7882232 ("mmc: renesas_sdhi:
> prevent overflow for max_req_size"), but I thought I'd better ask.
> 2) In theory, dma_max_mapping_size() can return a number that doesn't
> fit in 32-bit, and will be truncated (to e.g. 0), leading to max_req_size
> is zero?
This really should use a min_t on size_t. Otherwise the patch looks
fine:
Reviewed-by: Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Christoph Hellwig <hch-jcswGhMUV9g@public.gmane.org>
To: Geert Uytterhoeven <geert-Td1EMuHUCqxL1ZNQvxDV9g@public.gmane.org>
Cc: Jens Axboe <axboe-tSWWG44O7X1aa/9Udqfwiw@public.gmane.org>,
Linux-Renesas
<linux-renesas-soc-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org>,
Ulf Hansson <ulf.hansson-QSEj5FYQhm4dnm+yROfE0A@public.gmane.org>,
Linux MMC List
<linux-mmc-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org>,
Christoph Hellwig <hch-jcswGhMUV9g@public.gmane.org>,
linux-block-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org,
Wolfram Sang
<wsa+renesas-jBu1N2QxHDJrcw3mvpCnnVaTQe2KTcn/@public.gmane.org>,
Linux IOMMU
<iommu-cunTk1MwBs9QetFLy7KEm3xJsTq8ys+cHZ5vskTnxNA@public.gmane.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v6 4/5] mmc: tmio: Use dma_max_mapping_size() instead of a workaround
Date: Fri, 14 Jun 2019 09:18:00 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20190614071800.GB8420@lst.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAMuHMdXYqgPRX1WfUTRsKHhnSok5vfnr4AY36=vXoUvAxcNyWQ-JsoAwUIsXosN+BqQ9rBEUg@public.gmane.org>
On Thu, Jun 13, 2019 at 10:35:44PM +0200, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
> I'm always triggered by the use of min_t() and other casts:
> mmc->max_blk_size and mmc->max_blk_count are both unsigned int.
> dma_max_mapping_size() returns size_t, which can be 64-bit.
>
> 1) Can the multiplication overflow?
> Probably not, as per commit 2a55c1eac7882232 ("mmc: renesas_sdhi:
> prevent overflow for max_req_size"), but I thought I'd better ask.
> 2) In theory, dma_max_mapping_size() can return a number that doesn't
> fit in 32-bit, and will be truncated (to e.g. 0), leading to max_req_size
> is zero?
This really should use a min_t on size_t. Otherwise the patch looks
fine:
Reviewed-by: Christoph Hellwig <hch-jcswGhMUV9g@public.gmane.org>
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>
To: Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@linux-m68k.org>
Cc: Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk>,
Linux-Renesas <linux-renesas-soc@vger.kernel.org>,
Ulf Hansson <ulf.hansson@linaro.org>,
Linux MMC List <linux-mmc@vger.kernel.org>,
Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>,
linux-block@vger.kernel.org,
Wolfram Sang <wsa+renesas@sang-engineering.com>,
Linux IOMMU <iommu@lists.linux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v6 4/5] mmc: tmio: Use dma_max_mapping_size() instead of a workaround
Date: Fri, 14 Jun 2019 09:18:00 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20190614071800.GB8420@lst.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAMuHMdXYqgPRX1WfUTRsKHhnSok5vfnr4AY36=vXoUvAxcNyWQ@mail.gmail.com>
On Thu, Jun 13, 2019 at 10:35:44PM +0200, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
> I'm always triggered by the use of min_t() and other casts:
> mmc->max_blk_size and mmc->max_blk_count are both unsigned int.
> dma_max_mapping_size() returns size_t, which can be 64-bit.
>
> 1) Can the multiplication overflow?
> Probably not, as per commit 2a55c1eac7882232 ("mmc: renesas_sdhi:
> prevent overflow for max_req_size"), but I thought I'd better ask.
> 2) In theory, dma_max_mapping_size() can return a number that doesn't
> fit in 32-bit, and will be truncated (to e.g. 0), leading to max_req_size
> is zero?
This really should use a min_t on size_t. Otherwise the patch looks
fine:
Reviewed-by: Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>
_______________________________________________
iommu mailing list
iommu@lists.linux-foundation.org
https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/iommu
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2019-06-14 7:18 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 93+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2019-06-13 10:20 [RFC PATCH v6 0/5] treewide: improve R-Car SDHI performance Yoshihiro Shimoda
2019-06-13 10:20 ` Yoshihiro Shimoda
2019-06-13 10:20 ` Yoshihiro Shimoda
2019-06-13 10:20 ` [RFC PATCH v6 1/5] iommu: add an exported function to get minimum page size for a domain Yoshihiro Shimoda
2019-06-13 10:20 ` Yoshihiro Shimoda
2019-06-13 10:20 ` Yoshihiro Shimoda
2019-06-13 19:37 ` Wolfram Sang
2019-06-13 19:37 ` Wolfram Sang
2019-06-13 19:37 ` Wolfram Sang
2019-06-14 7:16 ` Christoph Hellwig
2019-06-14 7:16 ` Christoph Hellwig
2019-06-14 7:16 ` Christoph Hellwig
2019-06-17 5:08 ` Yoshihiro Shimoda
2019-06-17 5:08 ` Yoshihiro Shimoda
2019-06-17 5:08 ` Yoshihiro Shimoda
2019-06-14 9:41 ` Robin Murphy
2019-06-14 9:41 ` Robin Murphy
2019-06-14 9:41 ` Robin Murphy
2019-06-17 5:23 ` Yoshihiro Shimoda
2019-06-17 5:23 ` Yoshihiro Shimoda
2019-06-17 5:23 ` Yoshihiro Shimoda
2019-06-13 10:20 ` [RFC PATCH v6 2/5] block: sort headers on blk-setting.c Yoshihiro Shimoda
2019-06-13 10:20 ` Yoshihiro Shimoda
2019-06-13 10:20 ` Yoshihiro Shimoda
2019-06-13 19:40 ` Wolfram Sang
2019-06-13 19:40 ` Wolfram Sang
2019-06-13 19:40 ` Wolfram Sang
2019-06-13 10:20 ` [RFC PATCH v6 3/5] block: add a helper function to merge the segments by an IOMMU Yoshihiro Shimoda
2019-06-13 10:20 ` Yoshihiro Shimoda
2019-06-13 10:20 ` Yoshihiro Shimoda
2019-06-14 7:22 ` Christoph Hellwig
2019-06-14 7:22 ` Christoph Hellwig
2019-06-14 7:22 ` Christoph Hellwig
2019-06-14 9:54 ` Robin Murphy
2019-06-14 9:54 ` Robin Murphy
2019-06-14 9:54 ` Robin Murphy
2019-06-17 6:29 ` Yoshihiro Shimoda
2019-06-17 6:29 ` Yoshihiro Shimoda
2019-06-17 6:29 ` Yoshihiro Shimoda
2019-06-13 10:20 ` [RFC PATCH v6 4/5] mmc: tmio: Use dma_max_mapping_size() instead of a workaround Yoshihiro Shimoda
2019-06-13 10:20 ` Yoshihiro Shimoda
2019-06-13 10:20 ` Yoshihiro Shimoda
2019-06-13 19:45 ` Wolfram Sang
2019-06-13 19:45 ` Wolfram Sang
2019-06-13 19:45 ` Wolfram Sang
2019-06-17 4:25 ` Yoshihiro Shimoda
2019-06-17 4:25 ` Yoshihiro Shimoda
2019-06-17 4:25 ` Yoshihiro Shimoda
2019-06-13 20:35 ` Geert Uytterhoeven
2019-06-13 20:35 ` Geert Uytterhoeven
2019-06-13 20:35 ` Geert Uytterhoeven
2019-06-14 7:18 ` Christoph Hellwig [this message]
2019-06-14 7:18 ` Christoph Hellwig
2019-06-14 7:18 ` Christoph Hellwig
2019-06-14 7:27 ` Geert Uytterhoeven
2019-06-14 7:27 ` Geert Uytterhoeven
2019-06-14 7:27 ` Geert Uytterhoeven
2019-06-17 4:54 ` Yoshihiro Shimoda
2019-06-17 4:54 ` Yoshihiro Shimoda
2019-06-17 4:54 ` Yoshihiro Shimoda
2019-06-17 6:23 ` Geert Uytterhoeven
2019-06-17 6:23 ` Geert Uytterhoeven
2019-06-17 6:23 ` Geert Uytterhoeven
2019-06-17 6:54 ` Yoshihiro Shimoda
2019-06-17 6:54 ` Yoshihiro Shimoda
2019-06-17 6:54 ` Yoshihiro Shimoda
2019-06-13 10:20 ` [RFC PATCH v6 5/5] mmc: queue: Use bigger segments if IOMMU can merge the segments Yoshihiro Shimoda
2019-06-13 10:20 ` Yoshihiro Shimoda
2019-06-13 10:20 ` Yoshihiro Shimoda
2019-06-13 19:58 ` Wolfram Sang
2019-06-13 19:58 ` Wolfram Sang
2019-06-13 19:58 ` Wolfram Sang
2019-06-17 6:38 ` Yoshihiro Shimoda
2019-06-17 6:38 ` Yoshihiro Shimoda
2019-06-17 6:38 ` Yoshihiro Shimoda
2019-06-14 7:24 ` Christoph Hellwig
2019-06-14 7:24 ` Christoph Hellwig
2019-06-14 7:24 ` Christoph Hellwig
2019-06-14 10:42 ` Wolfram Sang
2019-06-14 10:42 ` Wolfram Sang
2019-06-14 10:42 ` Wolfram Sang
2019-06-17 6:46 ` Yoshihiro Shimoda
2019-06-17 6:46 ` Yoshihiro Shimoda
2019-06-17 6:46 ` Yoshihiro Shimoda
2019-06-17 6:53 ` Christoph Hellwig
2019-06-17 6:53 ` Christoph Hellwig
2019-06-17 6:53 ` Christoph Hellwig
2019-06-17 7:02 ` Yoshihiro Shimoda
2019-06-17 7:02 ` Yoshihiro Shimoda
2019-06-17 7:02 ` Yoshihiro Shimoda
2019-06-13 19:36 ` [RFC PATCH v6 0/5] treewide: improve R-Car SDHI performance Wolfram Sang
2019-06-13 19:36 ` Wolfram Sang
2019-06-13 19:36 ` Wolfram Sang
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=20190614071800.GB8420@lst.de \
--to=hch@lst.de \
--cc=axboe@kernel.dk \
--cc=geert@linux-m68k.org \
--cc=iommu@lists.linux-foundation.org \
--cc=joro@8bytes.org \
--cc=linux-block@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mmc@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-renesas-soc@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=ulf.hansson@linaro.org \
--cc=wsa+renesas@sang-engineering.com \
--cc=yoshihiro.shimoda.uh@renesas.com \
/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 an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.