* [PATCH 0/2] ARM: MAX_DMA_ADDRESS fixes @ 2022-03-24 17:54 ` Florian Fainelli 0 siblings, 0 replies; 22+ messages in thread From: Florian Fainelli @ 2022-03-24 17:54 UTC (permalink / raw) To: linux-arm-kernel Cc: Florian Fainelli, Russell King, Nicolas Pitre, Catalin Marinas, open list, linus.walleij, Geert Uytterhoeven, Rob Herring, Ard Biesheuvel This patch series clamps the MAX_DMA_ADDRESS to 32-bit in order to fit within a virtual address, and also fixes the off by one which was suggested by Geert. Florian Fainelli (2): ARM: Fix off by one in checking DMA zone size ARM: Clamp MAX_DMA_ADDRESS to 32-bit arch/arm/include/asm/dma.h | 4 +++- 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) -- 2.25.1 ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 22+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 0/2] ARM: MAX_DMA_ADDRESS fixes @ 2022-03-24 17:54 ` Florian Fainelli 0 siblings, 0 replies; 22+ messages in thread From: Florian Fainelli @ 2022-03-24 17:54 UTC (permalink / raw) To: linux-arm-kernel Cc: Florian Fainelli, Russell King, Nicolas Pitre, Catalin Marinas, open list, linus.walleij, Geert Uytterhoeven, Rob Herring, Ard Biesheuvel This patch series clamps the MAX_DMA_ADDRESS to 32-bit in order to fit within a virtual address, and also fixes the off by one which was suggested by Geert. Florian Fainelli (2): ARM: Fix off by one in checking DMA zone size ARM: Clamp MAX_DMA_ADDRESS to 32-bit arch/arm/include/asm/dma.h | 4 +++- 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) -- 2.25.1 _______________________________________________ linux-arm-kernel mailing list linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 22+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 1/2] ARM: Fix off by one in checking DMA zone size 2022-03-24 17:54 ` Florian Fainelli @ 2022-03-24 17:54 ` Florian Fainelli -1 siblings, 0 replies; 22+ messages in thread From: Florian Fainelli @ 2022-03-24 17:54 UTC (permalink / raw) To: linux-arm-kernel Cc: Florian Fainelli, Geert Uytterhoeven, Russell King, Nicolas Pitre, Catalin Marinas, open list, linus.walleij, Rob Herring, Ard Biesheuvel The maximum DMA address is PAGE_OFFSET + arm_dma_zone_size - 1, fix this by doing the appropriate subtraction. Fixes: 650320181a08 ("ARM: change ARM_DMA_ZONE_SIZE into a variable") Suggested-by: Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@linux-m68k.org> Signed-off-by: Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@gmail.com> --- arch/arm/include/asm/dma.h | 2 +- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/arch/arm/include/asm/dma.h b/arch/arm/include/asm/dma.h index a81dda65c576..f244ee68e814 100644 --- a/arch/arm/include/asm/dma.h +++ b/arch/arm/include/asm/dma.h @@ -11,7 +11,7 @@ #define MAX_DMA_ADDRESS ({ \ extern phys_addr_t arm_dma_zone_size; \ arm_dma_zone_size && arm_dma_zone_size < (0x10000000 - PAGE_OFFSET) ? \ - (PAGE_OFFSET + arm_dma_zone_size) : 0xffffffffUL; }) + (PAGE_OFFSET + arm_dma_zone_size - 1) : 0xffffffffUL; }) #endif #ifdef CONFIG_ISA_DMA_API -- 2.25.1 ^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 22+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 1/2] ARM: Fix off by one in checking DMA zone size @ 2022-03-24 17:54 ` Florian Fainelli 0 siblings, 0 replies; 22+ messages in thread From: Florian Fainelli @ 2022-03-24 17:54 UTC (permalink / raw) To: linux-arm-kernel Cc: Florian Fainelli, Geert Uytterhoeven, Russell King, Nicolas Pitre, Catalin Marinas, open list, linus.walleij, Rob Herring, Ard Biesheuvel The maximum DMA address is PAGE_OFFSET + arm_dma_zone_size - 1, fix this by doing the appropriate subtraction. Fixes: 650320181a08 ("ARM: change ARM_DMA_ZONE_SIZE into a variable") Suggested-by: Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@linux-m68k.org> Signed-off-by: Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@gmail.com> --- arch/arm/include/asm/dma.h | 2 +- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/arch/arm/include/asm/dma.h b/arch/arm/include/asm/dma.h index a81dda65c576..f244ee68e814 100644 --- a/arch/arm/include/asm/dma.h +++ b/arch/arm/include/asm/dma.h @@ -11,7 +11,7 @@ #define MAX_DMA_ADDRESS ({ \ extern phys_addr_t arm_dma_zone_size; \ arm_dma_zone_size && arm_dma_zone_size < (0x10000000 - PAGE_OFFSET) ? \ - (PAGE_OFFSET + arm_dma_zone_size) : 0xffffffffUL; }) + (PAGE_OFFSET + arm_dma_zone_size - 1) : 0xffffffffUL; }) #endif #ifdef CONFIG_ISA_DMA_API -- 2.25.1 _______________________________________________ linux-arm-kernel mailing list linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel ^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 22+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH 1/2] ARM: Fix off by one in checking DMA zone size 2022-03-24 17:54 ` Florian Fainelli @ 2022-03-24 19:02 ` Linus Walleij -1 siblings, 0 replies; 22+ messages in thread From: Linus Walleij @ 2022-03-24 19:02 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Florian Fainelli Cc: linux-arm-kernel, Geert Uytterhoeven, Russell King, Nicolas Pitre, Catalin Marinas, open list, Rob Herring, Ard Biesheuvel On Thu, Mar 24, 2022 at 6:54 PM Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@gmail.com> wrote: > The maximum DMA address is PAGE_OFFSET + arm_dma_zone_size - 1, fix this > by doing the appropriate subtraction. > > Fixes: 650320181a08 ("ARM: change ARM_DMA_ZONE_SIZE into a variable") > Suggested-by: Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@linux-m68k.org> > Signed-off-by: Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@gmail.com> Reviewed-by: Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@linaro.org> Yours, Linus Walleij ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 22+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH 1/2] ARM: Fix off by one in checking DMA zone size @ 2022-03-24 19:02 ` Linus Walleij 0 siblings, 0 replies; 22+ messages in thread From: Linus Walleij @ 2022-03-24 19:02 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Florian Fainelli Cc: linux-arm-kernel, Geert Uytterhoeven, Russell King, Nicolas Pitre, Catalin Marinas, open list, Rob Herring, Ard Biesheuvel On Thu, Mar 24, 2022 at 6:54 PM Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@gmail.com> wrote: > The maximum DMA address is PAGE_OFFSET + arm_dma_zone_size - 1, fix this > by doing the appropriate subtraction. > > Fixes: 650320181a08 ("ARM: change ARM_DMA_ZONE_SIZE into a variable") > Suggested-by: Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@linux-m68k.org> > Signed-off-by: Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@gmail.com> Reviewed-by: Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@linaro.org> Yours, Linus Walleij _______________________________________________ linux-arm-kernel mailing list linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 22+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH 1/2] ARM: Fix off by one in checking DMA zone size 2022-03-24 17:54 ` Florian Fainelli @ 2022-04-29 15:15 ` Russell King (Oracle) -1 siblings, 0 replies; 22+ messages in thread From: Russell King (Oracle) @ 2022-04-29 15:15 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Florian Fainelli Cc: linux-arm-kernel, Geert Uytterhoeven, Nicolas Pitre, Catalin Marinas, open list, linus.walleij, Rob Herring, Ard Biesheuvel On Thu, Mar 24, 2022 at 10:54:16AM -0700, Florian Fainelli wrote: > The maximum DMA address is PAGE_OFFSET + arm_dma_zone_size - 1, fix this > by doing the appropriate subtraction. The question is... is MAX_DMA_ADDRESS inclusive or exclusive. The answer is rather indeterminant, unfortunately. drivers/net/wan/cosa.c: if (b + len >= MAX_DMA_ADDRESS) So, if the buffer address + buffer length is equal to MAX_DMA_ADDRESS, then the buffer is not DMA-able. To me this looks completely wrong. It's also completely wrong because 'b' is a "unsigned long" which means on 32-bit, this can wrap. drivers/parport/parport_pc.c: unsigned long start = (unsigned long) buf; unsigned long end = (unsigned long) buf + length - 1; if (end < MAX_DMA_ADDRESS) { So, "end" is the last byte of the buffer. If MAX_DMA_ADDRESS is the last byte of the virtual address space that supports DMA, then if the two are equal, we do not use DMA. This seems wrong to me, and points to it being an _exclusive_ value - it's the last byte plus one. there's a bunch of memblock allocation functions that use __pa(MAX_DMA_ADDRESS) as the "min_addr" and if this is a minimum address, then surely this means that it is also an exclusive value. So, I came to the conclusion that MAX_DMA_ADDRESS is supposed to be exclusive. In other words, where PAGE_OFFSET + sizeof(ram) if sizeof(ram) is the size in bytes of the RAM, limited to the maximum addressable virtual address that RAM can be mapped to. I don't see an inclusive value being correct, at least not for the cases I've looekd at. -- RMK's Patch system: https://www.armlinux.org.uk/developer/patches/ FTTP is here! 40Mbps down 10Mbps up. Decent connectivity at last! ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 22+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH 1/2] ARM: Fix off by one in checking DMA zone size @ 2022-04-29 15:15 ` Russell King (Oracle) 0 siblings, 0 replies; 22+ messages in thread From: Russell King (Oracle) @ 2022-04-29 15:15 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Florian Fainelli Cc: linux-arm-kernel, Geert Uytterhoeven, Nicolas Pitre, Catalin Marinas, open list, linus.walleij, Rob Herring, Ard Biesheuvel On Thu, Mar 24, 2022 at 10:54:16AM -0700, Florian Fainelli wrote: > The maximum DMA address is PAGE_OFFSET + arm_dma_zone_size - 1, fix this > by doing the appropriate subtraction. The question is... is MAX_DMA_ADDRESS inclusive or exclusive. The answer is rather indeterminant, unfortunately. drivers/net/wan/cosa.c: if (b + len >= MAX_DMA_ADDRESS) So, if the buffer address + buffer length is equal to MAX_DMA_ADDRESS, then the buffer is not DMA-able. To me this looks completely wrong. It's also completely wrong because 'b' is a "unsigned long" which means on 32-bit, this can wrap. drivers/parport/parport_pc.c: unsigned long start = (unsigned long) buf; unsigned long end = (unsigned long) buf + length - 1; if (end < MAX_DMA_ADDRESS) { So, "end" is the last byte of the buffer. If MAX_DMA_ADDRESS is the last byte of the virtual address space that supports DMA, then if the two are equal, we do not use DMA. This seems wrong to me, and points to it being an _exclusive_ value - it's the last byte plus one. there's a bunch of memblock allocation functions that use __pa(MAX_DMA_ADDRESS) as the "min_addr" and if this is a minimum address, then surely this means that it is also an exclusive value. So, I came to the conclusion that MAX_DMA_ADDRESS is supposed to be exclusive. In other words, where PAGE_OFFSET + sizeof(ram) if sizeof(ram) is the size in bytes of the RAM, limited to the maximum addressable virtual address that RAM can be mapped to. I don't see an inclusive value being correct, at least not for the cases I've looekd at. -- RMK's Patch system: https://www.armlinux.org.uk/developer/patches/ FTTP is here! 40Mbps down 10Mbps up. Decent connectivity at last! _______________________________________________ linux-arm-kernel mailing list linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 22+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH 1/2] ARM: Fix off by one in checking DMA zone size 2022-04-29 15:15 ` Russell King (Oracle) @ 2022-04-29 15:45 ` Arnd Bergmann -1 siblings, 0 replies; 22+ messages in thread From: Arnd Bergmann @ 2022-04-29 15:45 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Russell King (Oracle) Cc: Florian Fainelli, Linux ARM, Geert Uytterhoeven, Nicolas Pitre, Catalin Marinas, open list, Linus Walleij, Rob Herring, Ard Biesheuvel On Fri, Apr 29, 2022 at 5:15 PM Russell King (Oracle) <linux@armlinux.org.uk> wrote: > > On Thu, Mar 24, 2022 at 10:54:16AM -0700, Florian Fainelli wrote: > > The maximum DMA address is PAGE_OFFSET + arm_dma_zone_size - 1, fix this > > by doing the appropriate subtraction. > > The question is... is MAX_DMA_ADDRESS inclusive or exclusive. The answer > is rather indeterminant, unfortunately. > > drivers/net/wan/cosa.c: if (b + len >= MAX_DMA_ADDRESS) > > So, if the buffer address + buffer length is equal to MAX_DMA_ADDRESS, > then the buffer is not DMA-able. To me this looks completely wrong. > It's also completely wrong because 'b' is a "unsigned long" which > means on 32-bit, this can wrap. This driver is on its way out and will be removed in 5.19. > there's a bunch of memblock allocation functions that use > __pa(MAX_DMA_ADDRESS) as the "min_addr" and if this is a minimum > address, then surely this means that it is also an exclusive value. > > So, I came to the conclusion that MAX_DMA_ADDRESS is supposed to be > exclusive. In other words, where PAGE_OFFSET + sizeof(ram) if > sizeof(ram) is the size in bytes of the RAM, limited to the maximum > addressable virtual address that RAM can be mapped to. > > I don't see an inclusive value being correct, at least not for the cases > I've looekd at. Looking at the other definitions, I see it's usually either ULONG_MAX (which is inclusive) or an exclusive limit, same as the existing version on arm: arch/alpha/include/asm/io.h:#define IDENT_ADDR 0xffff800000000000UL arch/alpha/include/asm/dma.h:#define MAX_DMA_ADDRESS (alpha_mv.mv_pci_tbi ? \ arch/alpha/include/asm/dma.h- ~0UL : IDENT_ADDR + 0x01000000) arch/arc/include/asm/dma.h:#define MAX_DMA_ADDRESS 0xC0000000 arch/hexagon/include/asm/dma.h:#define MAX_DMA_ADDRESS (PAGE_OFFSET) arch/ia64/mm/init.c:unsigned long MAX_DMA_ADDRESS = PAGE_OFFSET + 0x100000000UL; arch/m68k/include/asm/dma.h:#define MAX_DMA_ADDRESS PAGE_OFFSET arch/mips/include/asm/dma.h:#define MAX_DMA_ADDRESS PAGE_OFFSET arch/mips/include/asm/dma.h:#define MAX_DMA_ADDRESS (PAGE_OFFSET + 0x01000000) arch/parisc/include/asm/dma.h:#define MAX_DMA_ADDRESS (~0UL) arch/powerpc/include/asm/dma.h:#define MAX_DMA_ADDRESS (~0UL) arch/s390/include/asm/dma.h:#define MAX_DMA_ADDRESS 0x80000000 arch/sparc/include/asm/dma.h:#define MAX_DMA_ADDRESS (~0UL) arch/um/include/asm/dma.h:#define MAX_DMA_ADDRESS (uml_physmem) arch/x86/include/asm/dma.h:#define MAX_DMA_ADDRESS (PAGE_OFFSET + 0x1000000) arch/x86/include/asm/dma.h:#define MAX_DMA_PFN ((16UL * 1024 * 1024) >> PAGE_SHIFT) arch/x86/include/asm/dma.h:#define MAX_DMA_ADDRESS ((unsigned long)__va(MAX_DMA_PFN << PAGE_SHIFT)) The exceptions are: arch/xtensa/include/asm/kmem_layout.h:#define XCHAL_KIO_SIZE 0x10000000 arch/xtensa/include/asm/dma.h:#define MAX_DMA_ADDRESS (PAGE_OFFSET + XCHAL_KIO_SIZE - 1) arch/microblaze/include/asm/dma.h:#define MAX_DMA_ADDRESS (CONFIG_KERNEL_START + memory_size - 1) Arnd ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 22+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH 1/2] ARM: Fix off by one in checking DMA zone size @ 2022-04-29 15:45 ` Arnd Bergmann 0 siblings, 0 replies; 22+ messages in thread From: Arnd Bergmann @ 2022-04-29 15:45 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Russell King (Oracle) Cc: Florian Fainelli, Linux ARM, Geert Uytterhoeven, Nicolas Pitre, Catalin Marinas, open list, Linus Walleij, Rob Herring, Ard Biesheuvel On Fri, Apr 29, 2022 at 5:15 PM Russell King (Oracle) <linux@armlinux.org.uk> wrote: > > On Thu, Mar 24, 2022 at 10:54:16AM -0700, Florian Fainelli wrote: > > The maximum DMA address is PAGE_OFFSET + arm_dma_zone_size - 1, fix this > > by doing the appropriate subtraction. > > The question is... is MAX_DMA_ADDRESS inclusive or exclusive. The answer > is rather indeterminant, unfortunately. > > drivers/net/wan/cosa.c: if (b + len >= MAX_DMA_ADDRESS) > > So, if the buffer address + buffer length is equal to MAX_DMA_ADDRESS, > then the buffer is not DMA-able. To me this looks completely wrong. > It's also completely wrong because 'b' is a "unsigned long" which > means on 32-bit, this can wrap. This driver is on its way out and will be removed in 5.19. > there's a bunch of memblock allocation functions that use > __pa(MAX_DMA_ADDRESS) as the "min_addr" and if this is a minimum > address, then surely this means that it is also an exclusive value. > > So, I came to the conclusion that MAX_DMA_ADDRESS is supposed to be > exclusive. In other words, where PAGE_OFFSET + sizeof(ram) if > sizeof(ram) is the size in bytes of the RAM, limited to the maximum > addressable virtual address that RAM can be mapped to. > > I don't see an inclusive value being correct, at least not for the cases > I've looekd at. Looking at the other definitions, I see it's usually either ULONG_MAX (which is inclusive) or an exclusive limit, same as the existing version on arm: arch/alpha/include/asm/io.h:#define IDENT_ADDR 0xffff800000000000UL arch/alpha/include/asm/dma.h:#define MAX_DMA_ADDRESS (alpha_mv.mv_pci_tbi ? \ arch/alpha/include/asm/dma.h- ~0UL : IDENT_ADDR + 0x01000000) arch/arc/include/asm/dma.h:#define MAX_DMA_ADDRESS 0xC0000000 arch/hexagon/include/asm/dma.h:#define MAX_DMA_ADDRESS (PAGE_OFFSET) arch/ia64/mm/init.c:unsigned long MAX_DMA_ADDRESS = PAGE_OFFSET + 0x100000000UL; arch/m68k/include/asm/dma.h:#define MAX_DMA_ADDRESS PAGE_OFFSET arch/mips/include/asm/dma.h:#define MAX_DMA_ADDRESS PAGE_OFFSET arch/mips/include/asm/dma.h:#define MAX_DMA_ADDRESS (PAGE_OFFSET + 0x01000000) arch/parisc/include/asm/dma.h:#define MAX_DMA_ADDRESS (~0UL) arch/powerpc/include/asm/dma.h:#define MAX_DMA_ADDRESS (~0UL) arch/s390/include/asm/dma.h:#define MAX_DMA_ADDRESS 0x80000000 arch/sparc/include/asm/dma.h:#define MAX_DMA_ADDRESS (~0UL) arch/um/include/asm/dma.h:#define MAX_DMA_ADDRESS (uml_physmem) arch/x86/include/asm/dma.h:#define MAX_DMA_ADDRESS (PAGE_OFFSET + 0x1000000) arch/x86/include/asm/dma.h:#define MAX_DMA_PFN ((16UL * 1024 * 1024) >> PAGE_SHIFT) arch/x86/include/asm/dma.h:#define MAX_DMA_ADDRESS ((unsigned long)__va(MAX_DMA_PFN << PAGE_SHIFT)) The exceptions are: arch/xtensa/include/asm/kmem_layout.h:#define XCHAL_KIO_SIZE 0x10000000 arch/xtensa/include/asm/dma.h:#define MAX_DMA_ADDRESS (PAGE_OFFSET + XCHAL_KIO_SIZE - 1) arch/microblaze/include/asm/dma.h:#define MAX_DMA_ADDRESS (CONFIG_KERNEL_START + memory_size - 1) Arnd _______________________________________________ linux-arm-kernel mailing list linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 22+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] ARM: Clamp MAX_DMA_ADDRESS to 32-bit 2022-03-24 17:54 ` Florian Fainelli @ 2022-03-24 17:54 ` Florian Fainelli -1 siblings, 0 replies; 22+ messages in thread From: Florian Fainelli @ 2022-03-24 17:54 UTC (permalink / raw) To: linux-arm-kernel Cc: Florian Fainelli, Russell King, Nicolas Pitre, Catalin Marinas, open list, linus.walleij, Geert Uytterhoeven, Rob Herring, Ard Biesheuvel MAX_DMA_ADDRESS is a virtual address, therefore it needs to fit within a 32-bit unsigned quantity. Platforms defining a DMA zone size in their machine descriptor can easily overflow this quantity depending on the DMA zone size and/or the PAGE_OFFSET setting. In most cases this is harmless, however in the case of a CONFIG_DEBUG_VIRTUAL enabled, __virt_addr_valid() will be unable to return that MAX_DMA_ADDRESS is valid because the value passed to that function is an unsigned long which has already overflowed. Fixes: e377cd8221eb ("ARM: 8640/1: Add support for CONFIG_DEBUG_VIRTUAL") Fixes: 2fb3ec5c9503 ("ARM: Replace platform definition of ISA_DMA_THRESHOLD/MAX_DMA_ADDRESS") Signed-off-by: Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@gmail.com> --- arch/arm/include/asm/dma.h | 4 +++- 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/arch/arm/include/asm/dma.h b/arch/arm/include/asm/dma.h index f244ee68e814..ea47420babd4 100644 --- a/arch/arm/include/asm/dma.h +++ b/arch/arm/include/asm/dma.h @@ -8,10 +8,12 @@ #ifndef CONFIG_ZONE_DMA #define MAX_DMA_ADDRESS 0xffffffffUL #else +#include <linux/minmax.h> #define MAX_DMA_ADDRESS ({ \ extern phys_addr_t arm_dma_zone_size; \ arm_dma_zone_size && arm_dma_zone_size < (0x10000000 - PAGE_OFFSET) ? \ - (PAGE_OFFSET + arm_dma_zone_size - 1) : 0xffffffffUL; }) + min_t(phys_addr_t, (PAGE_OFFSET + arm_dma_zone_size - 1), 0xffffffffUL) : \ + 0xffffffffUL; }) #endif #ifdef CONFIG_ISA_DMA_API -- 2.25.1 ^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 22+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] ARM: Clamp MAX_DMA_ADDRESS to 32-bit @ 2022-03-24 17:54 ` Florian Fainelli 0 siblings, 0 replies; 22+ messages in thread From: Florian Fainelli @ 2022-03-24 17:54 UTC (permalink / raw) To: linux-arm-kernel Cc: Florian Fainelli, Russell King, Nicolas Pitre, Catalin Marinas, open list, linus.walleij, Geert Uytterhoeven, Rob Herring, Ard Biesheuvel MAX_DMA_ADDRESS is a virtual address, therefore it needs to fit within a 32-bit unsigned quantity. Platforms defining a DMA zone size in their machine descriptor can easily overflow this quantity depending on the DMA zone size and/or the PAGE_OFFSET setting. In most cases this is harmless, however in the case of a CONFIG_DEBUG_VIRTUAL enabled, __virt_addr_valid() will be unable to return that MAX_DMA_ADDRESS is valid because the value passed to that function is an unsigned long which has already overflowed. Fixes: e377cd8221eb ("ARM: 8640/1: Add support for CONFIG_DEBUG_VIRTUAL") Fixes: 2fb3ec5c9503 ("ARM: Replace platform definition of ISA_DMA_THRESHOLD/MAX_DMA_ADDRESS") Signed-off-by: Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@gmail.com> --- arch/arm/include/asm/dma.h | 4 +++- 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/arch/arm/include/asm/dma.h b/arch/arm/include/asm/dma.h index f244ee68e814..ea47420babd4 100644 --- a/arch/arm/include/asm/dma.h +++ b/arch/arm/include/asm/dma.h @@ -8,10 +8,12 @@ #ifndef CONFIG_ZONE_DMA #define MAX_DMA_ADDRESS 0xffffffffUL #else +#include <linux/minmax.h> #define MAX_DMA_ADDRESS ({ \ extern phys_addr_t arm_dma_zone_size; \ arm_dma_zone_size && arm_dma_zone_size < (0x10000000 - PAGE_OFFSET) ? \ - (PAGE_OFFSET + arm_dma_zone_size - 1) : 0xffffffffUL; }) + min_t(phys_addr_t, (PAGE_OFFSET + arm_dma_zone_size - 1), 0xffffffffUL) : \ + 0xffffffffUL; }) #endif #ifdef CONFIG_ISA_DMA_API -- 2.25.1 _______________________________________________ linux-arm-kernel mailing list linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel ^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 22+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH 2/2] ARM: Clamp MAX_DMA_ADDRESS to 32-bit 2022-03-24 17:54 ` Florian Fainelli @ 2022-03-24 19:02 ` Linus Walleij -1 siblings, 0 replies; 22+ messages in thread From: Linus Walleij @ 2022-03-24 19:02 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Florian Fainelli Cc: linux-arm-kernel, Russell King, Nicolas Pitre, Catalin Marinas, open list, Geert Uytterhoeven, Rob Herring, Ard Biesheuvel On Thu, Mar 24, 2022 at 6:54 PM Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@gmail.com> wrote: > MAX_DMA_ADDRESS is a virtual address, therefore it needs to fit within a > 32-bit unsigned quantity. Platforms defining a DMA zone size in > their machine descriptor can easily overflow this quantity depending on > the DMA zone size and/or the PAGE_OFFSET setting. > > In most cases this is harmless, however in the case of a > CONFIG_DEBUG_VIRTUAL enabled, __virt_addr_valid() will be unable to > return that MAX_DMA_ADDRESS is valid because the value passed to that > function is an unsigned long which has already overflowed. > > Fixes: e377cd8221eb ("ARM: 8640/1: Add support for CONFIG_DEBUG_VIRTUAL") > Fixes: 2fb3ec5c9503 ("ARM: Replace platform definition of ISA_DMA_THRESHOLD/MAX_DMA_ADDRESS") > Signed-off-by: Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@gmail.com> Reviewed-by: Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@linaro.org> Yours, Linus Walleij ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 22+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH 2/2] ARM: Clamp MAX_DMA_ADDRESS to 32-bit @ 2022-03-24 19:02 ` Linus Walleij 0 siblings, 0 replies; 22+ messages in thread From: Linus Walleij @ 2022-03-24 19:02 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Florian Fainelli Cc: linux-arm-kernel, Russell King, Nicolas Pitre, Catalin Marinas, open list, Geert Uytterhoeven, Rob Herring, Ard Biesheuvel On Thu, Mar 24, 2022 at 6:54 PM Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@gmail.com> wrote: > MAX_DMA_ADDRESS is a virtual address, therefore it needs to fit within a > 32-bit unsigned quantity. Platforms defining a DMA zone size in > their machine descriptor can easily overflow this quantity depending on > the DMA zone size and/or the PAGE_OFFSET setting. > > In most cases this is harmless, however in the case of a > CONFIG_DEBUG_VIRTUAL enabled, __virt_addr_valid() will be unable to > return that MAX_DMA_ADDRESS is valid because the value passed to that > function is an unsigned long which has already overflowed. > > Fixes: e377cd8221eb ("ARM: 8640/1: Add support for CONFIG_DEBUG_VIRTUAL") > Fixes: 2fb3ec5c9503 ("ARM: Replace platform definition of ISA_DMA_THRESHOLD/MAX_DMA_ADDRESS") > Signed-off-by: Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@gmail.com> Reviewed-by: Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@linaro.org> Yours, Linus Walleij _______________________________________________ linux-arm-kernel mailing list linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 22+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH 2/2] ARM: Clamp MAX_DMA_ADDRESS to 32-bit 2022-03-24 17:54 ` Florian Fainelli @ 2022-03-24 20:31 ` Geert Uytterhoeven -1 siblings, 0 replies; 22+ messages in thread From: Geert Uytterhoeven @ 2022-03-24 20:31 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Florian Fainelli Cc: Linux ARM, Russell King, Nicolas Pitre, Catalin Marinas, open list, Linus Walleij, Rob Herring, Ard Biesheuvel Hi Florian, On Thu, Mar 24, 2022 at 6:54 PM Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@gmail.com> wrote: > MAX_DMA_ADDRESS is a virtual address, therefore it needs to fit within a > 32-bit unsigned quantity. Platforms defining a DMA zone size in > their machine descriptor can easily overflow this quantity depending on > the DMA zone size and/or the PAGE_OFFSET setting. > > In most cases this is harmless, however in the case of a > CONFIG_DEBUG_VIRTUAL enabled, __virt_addr_valid() will be unable to > return that MAX_DMA_ADDRESS is valid because the value passed to that > function is an unsigned long which has already overflowed. > > Fixes: e377cd8221eb ("ARM: 8640/1: Add support for CONFIG_DEBUG_VIRTUAL") > Fixes: 2fb3ec5c9503 ("ARM: Replace platform definition of ISA_DMA_THRESHOLD/MAX_DMA_ADDRESS") > Signed-off-by: Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@gmail.com> > --- a/arch/arm/include/asm/dma.h > +++ b/arch/arm/include/asm/dma.h > @@ -8,10 +8,12 @@ > #ifndef CONFIG_ZONE_DMA > #define MAX_DMA_ADDRESS 0xffffffffUL > #else > +#include <linux/minmax.h> > #define MAX_DMA_ADDRESS ({ \ > extern phys_addr_t arm_dma_zone_size; \ > arm_dma_zone_size && arm_dma_zone_size < (0x10000000 - PAGE_OFFSET) ? \ "arm_dma_zone_size < (0x10000000 - PAGE_OFFSET)" looks like an overflow-avoiding version of "PAGE_OFFSET + arm_dma_zone_size < 0x10000000". However, PAGE_OFFSET is always larger than 0x10000000, so "0x10000000 - PAGE_OFFSET" is a rather large number? > - (PAGE_OFFSET + arm_dma_zone_size - 1) : 0xffffffffUL; }) > + min_t(phys_addr_t, (PAGE_OFFSET + arm_dma_zone_size - 1), 0xffffffffUL) : \ > + 0xffffffffUL; }) > #endif > > #ifdef CONFIG_ISA_DMA_API Gr{oetje,eeting}s, Geert -- Geert Uytterhoeven -- There's lots of Linux beyond ia32 -- geert@linux-m68k.org In personal conversations with technical people, I call myself a hacker. But when I'm talking to journalists I just say "programmer" or something like that. -- Linus Torvalds ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 22+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH 2/2] ARM: Clamp MAX_DMA_ADDRESS to 32-bit @ 2022-03-24 20:31 ` Geert Uytterhoeven 0 siblings, 0 replies; 22+ messages in thread From: Geert Uytterhoeven @ 2022-03-24 20:31 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Florian Fainelli Cc: Linux ARM, Russell King, Nicolas Pitre, Catalin Marinas, open list, Linus Walleij, Rob Herring, Ard Biesheuvel Hi Florian, On Thu, Mar 24, 2022 at 6:54 PM Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@gmail.com> wrote: > MAX_DMA_ADDRESS is a virtual address, therefore it needs to fit within a > 32-bit unsigned quantity. Platforms defining a DMA zone size in > their machine descriptor can easily overflow this quantity depending on > the DMA zone size and/or the PAGE_OFFSET setting. > > In most cases this is harmless, however in the case of a > CONFIG_DEBUG_VIRTUAL enabled, __virt_addr_valid() will be unable to > return that MAX_DMA_ADDRESS is valid because the value passed to that > function is an unsigned long which has already overflowed. > > Fixes: e377cd8221eb ("ARM: 8640/1: Add support for CONFIG_DEBUG_VIRTUAL") > Fixes: 2fb3ec5c9503 ("ARM: Replace platform definition of ISA_DMA_THRESHOLD/MAX_DMA_ADDRESS") > Signed-off-by: Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@gmail.com> > --- a/arch/arm/include/asm/dma.h > +++ b/arch/arm/include/asm/dma.h > @@ -8,10 +8,12 @@ > #ifndef CONFIG_ZONE_DMA > #define MAX_DMA_ADDRESS 0xffffffffUL > #else > +#include <linux/minmax.h> > #define MAX_DMA_ADDRESS ({ \ > extern phys_addr_t arm_dma_zone_size; \ > arm_dma_zone_size && arm_dma_zone_size < (0x10000000 - PAGE_OFFSET) ? \ "arm_dma_zone_size < (0x10000000 - PAGE_OFFSET)" looks like an overflow-avoiding version of "PAGE_OFFSET + arm_dma_zone_size < 0x10000000". However, PAGE_OFFSET is always larger than 0x10000000, so "0x10000000 - PAGE_OFFSET" is a rather large number? > - (PAGE_OFFSET + arm_dma_zone_size - 1) : 0xffffffffUL; }) > + min_t(phys_addr_t, (PAGE_OFFSET + arm_dma_zone_size - 1), 0xffffffffUL) : \ > + 0xffffffffUL; }) > #endif > > #ifdef CONFIG_ISA_DMA_API Gr{oetje,eeting}s, Geert -- Geert Uytterhoeven -- There's lots of Linux beyond ia32 -- geert@linux-m68k.org In personal conversations with technical people, I call myself a hacker. But when I'm talking to journalists I just say "programmer" or something like that. -- Linus Torvalds _______________________________________________ linux-arm-kernel mailing list linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 22+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH 2/2] ARM: Clamp MAX_DMA_ADDRESS to 32-bit 2022-03-24 20:31 ` Geert Uytterhoeven @ 2022-03-24 22:39 ` Florian Fainelli -1 siblings, 0 replies; 22+ messages in thread From: Florian Fainelli @ 2022-03-24 22:39 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Geert Uytterhoeven, Santosh Shilimkar Cc: Linux ARM, Russell King, Nicolas Pitre, Catalin Marinas, open list, Linus Walleij, Rob Herring, Ard Biesheuvel On 3/24/22 13:31, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote: > Hi Florian, > > On Thu, Mar 24, 2022 at 6:54 PM Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@gmail.com> wrote: >> MAX_DMA_ADDRESS is a virtual address, therefore it needs to fit within a >> 32-bit unsigned quantity. Platforms defining a DMA zone size in >> their machine descriptor can easily overflow this quantity depending on >> the DMA zone size and/or the PAGE_OFFSET setting. >> >> In most cases this is harmless, however in the case of a >> CONFIG_DEBUG_VIRTUAL enabled, __virt_addr_valid() will be unable to >> return that MAX_DMA_ADDRESS is valid because the value passed to that >> function is an unsigned long which has already overflowed. >> >> Fixes: e377cd8221eb ("ARM: 8640/1: Add support for CONFIG_DEBUG_VIRTUAL") >> Fixes: 2fb3ec5c9503 ("ARM: Replace platform definition of ISA_DMA_THRESHOLD/MAX_DMA_ADDRESS") >> Signed-off-by: Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@gmail.com> > >> --- a/arch/arm/include/asm/dma.h >> +++ b/arch/arm/include/asm/dma.h >> @@ -8,10 +8,12 @@ >> #ifndef CONFIG_ZONE_DMA >> #define MAX_DMA_ADDRESS 0xffffffffUL >> #else >> +#include <linux/minmax.h> >> #define MAX_DMA_ADDRESS ({ \ >> extern phys_addr_t arm_dma_zone_size; \ >> arm_dma_zone_size && arm_dma_zone_size < (0x10000000 - PAGE_OFFSET) ? \ > > "arm_dma_zone_size < (0x10000000 - PAGE_OFFSET)" looks > like an overflow-avoiding version of > "PAGE_OFFSET + arm_dma_zone_size < 0x10000000". > However, PAGE_OFFSET is always larger than 0x10000000, > so "0x10000000 - PAGE_OFFSET" is a rather large number? Yes it is a large number, though I am not too sure what the intention of this check was in the first place, whether it denoted the largest known DMA size of any machine at the time, or if it has any relationship to lowmem (in which case it does not account for its exact value since it can be changed indirectly via vmalloc= on the command line). We ought to be just fine with keeping only: min_t(phys_addr_t, (PAGE_OFFSET + arm_dma_zone_size - 1), 0xffffffffUL); Santosh, what did 0x10000000 mean when you added it? -- Florian ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 22+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH 2/2] ARM: Clamp MAX_DMA_ADDRESS to 32-bit @ 2022-03-24 22:39 ` Florian Fainelli 0 siblings, 0 replies; 22+ messages in thread From: Florian Fainelli @ 2022-03-24 22:39 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Geert Uytterhoeven, Santosh Shilimkar Cc: Linux ARM, Russell King, Nicolas Pitre, Catalin Marinas, open list, Linus Walleij, Rob Herring, Ard Biesheuvel On 3/24/22 13:31, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote: > Hi Florian, > > On Thu, Mar 24, 2022 at 6:54 PM Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@gmail.com> wrote: >> MAX_DMA_ADDRESS is a virtual address, therefore it needs to fit within a >> 32-bit unsigned quantity. Platforms defining a DMA zone size in >> their machine descriptor can easily overflow this quantity depending on >> the DMA zone size and/or the PAGE_OFFSET setting. >> >> In most cases this is harmless, however in the case of a >> CONFIG_DEBUG_VIRTUAL enabled, __virt_addr_valid() will be unable to >> return that MAX_DMA_ADDRESS is valid because the value passed to that >> function is an unsigned long which has already overflowed. >> >> Fixes: e377cd8221eb ("ARM: 8640/1: Add support for CONFIG_DEBUG_VIRTUAL") >> Fixes: 2fb3ec5c9503 ("ARM: Replace platform definition of ISA_DMA_THRESHOLD/MAX_DMA_ADDRESS") >> Signed-off-by: Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@gmail.com> > >> --- a/arch/arm/include/asm/dma.h >> +++ b/arch/arm/include/asm/dma.h >> @@ -8,10 +8,12 @@ >> #ifndef CONFIG_ZONE_DMA >> #define MAX_DMA_ADDRESS 0xffffffffUL >> #else >> +#include <linux/minmax.h> >> #define MAX_DMA_ADDRESS ({ \ >> extern phys_addr_t arm_dma_zone_size; \ >> arm_dma_zone_size && arm_dma_zone_size < (0x10000000 - PAGE_OFFSET) ? \ > > "arm_dma_zone_size < (0x10000000 - PAGE_OFFSET)" looks > like an overflow-avoiding version of > "PAGE_OFFSET + arm_dma_zone_size < 0x10000000". > However, PAGE_OFFSET is always larger than 0x10000000, > so "0x10000000 - PAGE_OFFSET" is a rather large number? Yes it is a large number, though I am not too sure what the intention of this check was in the first place, whether it denoted the largest known DMA size of any machine at the time, or if it has any relationship to lowmem (in which case it does not account for its exact value since it can be changed indirectly via vmalloc= on the command line). We ought to be just fine with keeping only: min_t(phys_addr_t, (PAGE_OFFSET + arm_dma_zone_size - 1), 0xffffffffUL); Santosh, what did 0x10000000 mean when you added it? -- Florian _______________________________________________ linux-arm-kernel mailing list linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 22+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH 2/2] ARM: Clamp MAX_DMA_ADDRESS to 32-bit 2022-03-24 20:31 ` Geert Uytterhoeven @ 2022-04-29 15:07 ` Russell King (Oracle) -1 siblings, 0 replies; 22+ messages in thread From: Russell King (Oracle) @ 2022-04-29 15:07 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Geert Uytterhoeven Cc: Florian Fainelli, Linux ARM, Nicolas Pitre, Catalin Marinas, open list, Linus Walleij, Rob Herring, Ard Biesheuvel On Thu, Mar 24, 2022 at 09:31:56PM +0100, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote: > Hi Florian, > > On Thu, Mar 24, 2022 at 6:54 PM Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@gmail.com> wrote: > > MAX_DMA_ADDRESS is a virtual address, therefore it needs to fit within a > > 32-bit unsigned quantity. Platforms defining a DMA zone size in > > their machine descriptor can easily overflow this quantity depending on > > the DMA zone size and/or the PAGE_OFFSET setting. > > > > In most cases this is harmless, however in the case of a > > CONFIG_DEBUG_VIRTUAL enabled, __virt_addr_valid() will be unable to > > return that MAX_DMA_ADDRESS is valid because the value passed to that > > function is an unsigned long which has already overflowed. > > > > Fixes: e377cd8221eb ("ARM: 8640/1: Add support for CONFIG_DEBUG_VIRTUAL") > > Fixes: 2fb3ec5c9503 ("ARM: Replace platform definition of ISA_DMA_THRESHOLD/MAX_DMA_ADDRESS") > > Signed-off-by: Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@gmail.com> > > > --- a/arch/arm/include/asm/dma.h > > +++ b/arch/arm/include/asm/dma.h > > @@ -8,10 +8,12 @@ > > #ifndef CONFIG_ZONE_DMA > > #define MAX_DMA_ADDRESS 0xffffffffUL > > #else > > +#include <linux/minmax.h> > > #define MAX_DMA_ADDRESS ({ \ > > extern phys_addr_t arm_dma_zone_size; \ > > arm_dma_zone_size && arm_dma_zone_size < (0x10000000 - PAGE_OFFSET) ? \ > > "arm_dma_zone_size < (0x10000000 - PAGE_OFFSET)" looks > like an overflow-avoiding version of > "PAGE_OFFSET + arm_dma_zone_size < 0x10000000". > However, PAGE_OFFSET is always larger than 0x10000000, > so "0x10000000 - PAGE_OFFSET" is a rather large number? This, to me, looks like it should have been: arm_dma_zone_size && arm_dma_zone_size < (0x100000000 - PAGE_OFFSET) ? \ since that is the only thing that would make sense - it's the virtual space remaining between PAGE_OFFSET and the top of addressable space. However, 0x100000000 isn't correct - since the vectors live at 0xffff0000, and we have the vmalloc space etc. -- RMK's Patch system: https://www.armlinux.org.uk/developer/patches/ FTTP is here! 40Mbps down 10Mbps up. Decent connectivity at last! ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 22+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH 2/2] ARM: Clamp MAX_DMA_ADDRESS to 32-bit @ 2022-04-29 15:07 ` Russell King (Oracle) 0 siblings, 0 replies; 22+ messages in thread From: Russell King (Oracle) @ 2022-04-29 15:07 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Geert Uytterhoeven Cc: Florian Fainelli, Linux ARM, Nicolas Pitre, Catalin Marinas, open list, Linus Walleij, Rob Herring, Ard Biesheuvel On Thu, Mar 24, 2022 at 09:31:56PM +0100, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote: > Hi Florian, > > On Thu, Mar 24, 2022 at 6:54 PM Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@gmail.com> wrote: > > MAX_DMA_ADDRESS is a virtual address, therefore it needs to fit within a > > 32-bit unsigned quantity. Platforms defining a DMA zone size in > > their machine descriptor can easily overflow this quantity depending on > > the DMA zone size and/or the PAGE_OFFSET setting. > > > > In most cases this is harmless, however in the case of a > > CONFIG_DEBUG_VIRTUAL enabled, __virt_addr_valid() will be unable to > > return that MAX_DMA_ADDRESS is valid because the value passed to that > > function is an unsigned long which has already overflowed. > > > > Fixes: e377cd8221eb ("ARM: 8640/1: Add support for CONFIG_DEBUG_VIRTUAL") > > Fixes: 2fb3ec5c9503 ("ARM: Replace platform definition of ISA_DMA_THRESHOLD/MAX_DMA_ADDRESS") > > Signed-off-by: Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@gmail.com> > > > --- a/arch/arm/include/asm/dma.h > > +++ b/arch/arm/include/asm/dma.h > > @@ -8,10 +8,12 @@ > > #ifndef CONFIG_ZONE_DMA > > #define MAX_DMA_ADDRESS 0xffffffffUL > > #else > > +#include <linux/minmax.h> > > #define MAX_DMA_ADDRESS ({ \ > > extern phys_addr_t arm_dma_zone_size; \ > > arm_dma_zone_size && arm_dma_zone_size < (0x10000000 - PAGE_OFFSET) ? \ > > "arm_dma_zone_size < (0x10000000 - PAGE_OFFSET)" looks > like an overflow-avoiding version of > "PAGE_OFFSET + arm_dma_zone_size < 0x10000000". > However, PAGE_OFFSET is always larger than 0x10000000, > so "0x10000000 - PAGE_OFFSET" is a rather large number? This, to me, looks like it should have been: arm_dma_zone_size && arm_dma_zone_size < (0x100000000 - PAGE_OFFSET) ? \ since that is the only thing that would make sense - it's the virtual space remaining between PAGE_OFFSET and the top of addressable space. However, 0x100000000 isn't correct - since the vectors live at 0xffff0000, and we have the vmalloc space etc. -- RMK's Patch system: https://www.armlinux.org.uk/developer/patches/ FTTP is here! 40Mbps down 10Mbps up. Decent connectivity at last! _______________________________________________ linux-arm-kernel mailing list linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 22+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH 0/2] ARM: MAX_DMA_ADDRESS fixes 2022-03-24 17:54 ` Florian Fainelli @ 2022-04-26 16:29 ` Florian Fainelli -1 siblings, 0 replies; 22+ messages in thread From: Florian Fainelli @ 2022-04-26 16:29 UTC (permalink / raw) To: linux-arm-kernel, Russell King Cc: Nicolas Pitre, Catalin Marinas, open list, linus.walleij, Geert Uytterhoeven, Rob Herring, Ard Biesheuvel On 3/24/22 10:54, Florian Fainelli wrote: > This patch series clamps the MAX_DMA_ADDRESS to 32-bit in order to fit > within a virtual address, and also fixes the off by one which was > suggested by Geert. > > Florian Fainelli (2): > ARM: Fix off by one in checking DMA zone size > ARM: Clamp MAX_DMA_ADDRESS to 32-bit Russell, do you have any feedback on these two patches? -- Florian ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 22+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH 0/2] ARM: MAX_DMA_ADDRESS fixes @ 2022-04-26 16:29 ` Florian Fainelli 0 siblings, 0 replies; 22+ messages in thread From: Florian Fainelli @ 2022-04-26 16:29 UTC (permalink / raw) To: linux-arm-kernel, Russell King Cc: Nicolas Pitre, Catalin Marinas, open list, linus.walleij, Geert Uytterhoeven, Rob Herring, Ard Biesheuvel On 3/24/22 10:54, Florian Fainelli wrote: > This patch series clamps the MAX_DMA_ADDRESS to 32-bit in order to fit > within a virtual address, and also fixes the off by one which was > suggested by Geert. > > Florian Fainelli (2): > ARM: Fix off by one in checking DMA zone size > ARM: Clamp MAX_DMA_ADDRESS to 32-bit Russell, do you have any feedback on these two patches? -- Florian _______________________________________________ linux-arm-kernel mailing list linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 22+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2022-04-29 15:47 UTC | newest] Thread overview: 22+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed) -- links below jump to the message on this page -- 2022-03-24 17:54 [PATCH 0/2] ARM: MAX_DMA_ADDRESS fixes Florian Fainelli 2022-03-24 17:54 ` Florian Fainelli 2022-03-24 17:54 ` [PATCH 1/2] ARM: Fix off by one in checking DMA zone size Florian Fainelli 2022-03-24 17:54 ` Florian Fainelli 2022-03-24 19:02 ` Linus Walleij 2022-03-24 19:02 ` Linus Walleij 2022-04-29 15:15 ` Russell King (Oracle) 2022-04-29 15:15 ` Russell King (Oracle) 2022-04-29 15:45 ` Arnd Bergmann 2022-04-29 15:45 ` Arnd Bergmann 2022-03-24 17:54 ` [PATCH 2/2] ARM: Clamp MAX_DMA_ADDRESS to 32-bit Florian Fainelli 2022-03-24 17:54 ` Florian Fainelli 2022-03-24 19:02 ` Linus Walleij 2022-03-24 19:02 ` Linus Walleij 2022-03-24 20:31 ` Geert Uytterhoeven 2022-03-24 20:31 ` Geert Uytterhoeven 2022-03-24 22:39 ` Florian Fainelli 2022-03-24 22:39 ` Florian Fainelli 2022-04-29 15:07 ` Russell King (Oracle) 2022-04-29 15:07 ` Russell King (Oracle) 2022-04-26 16:29 ` [PATCH 0/2] ARM: MAX_DMA_ADDRESS fixes Florian Fainelli 2022-04-26 16:29 ` Florian Fainelli
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.