From: Thomas Hellstrom <thellstrom@vmware.com>
To: "hch@lst.de" <hch@lst.de>
Cc: "thomas.lendacky@amd.com" <thomas.lendacky@amd.com>,
"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
"christian.koenig@amd.com" <christian.koenig@amd.com>,
"linux-mm@kvack.org" <linux-mm@kvack.org>,
"iommu@lists.linux-foundation.org"
<iommu@lists.linux-foundation.org>,
Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk <konrad.wilk@oracle.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] dma-mapping: force unencryped devices are always addressing limited
Date: Thu, 28 Nov 2019 08:02:16 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <MN2PR05MB6141B6D7E28A146EBF9CE79FA1470@MN2PR05MB6141.namprd05.prod.outlook.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: 20191128075153.GD20659@lst.de
On 11/28/19 8:51 AM, hch@lst.de wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 27, 2019 at 06:22:57PM +0000, Thomas Hellstrom wrote:
>>> bool dma_addressing_limited(struct device *dev)
>>> {
>>> + if (force_dma_unencrypted(dev))
>>> + return true;
>>> return min_not_zero(dma_get_mask(dev), dev->bus_dma_limit) <
>>> dma_get_required_mask(dev);
>>> }
>> Any chance to have the case
>>
>> (swiotlb_force == SWIOTLB_FORCE)
>>
>> also included?
> We have a hard time handling that in generic code. Do we have any
> good use case for SWIOTLB_FORCE not that we have force_dma_unencrypted?
> I'd love to be able to get rid of it..
>
IIRC the justification for it is debugging. Drivers that don't do
syncing correctly or have incorrect assumptions of initialization of DMA
memory will not work properly when SWIOTLB is forced. We recently found
a vmw_pvscsi device flaw that way...
/Thomas
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2019-11-28 8:02 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2019-11-27 14:40 make dma_addressing_limited work for memory encryption setups Christoph Hellwig
2019-11-27 14:40 ` [PATCH 1/2] dma-mapping: move dma_addressing_limited out of line Christoph Hellwig
2019-11-27 17:13 ` Matthew Wilcox
2019-11-27 14:40 ` [PATCH 2/2] dma-mapping: force unencryped devices are always addressing limited Christoph Hellwig
2019-11-27 18:22 ` Thomas Hellstrom
2019-11-28 7:51 ` hch
2019-11-28 8:02 ` Thomas Hellstrom [this message]
2019-11-28 15:36 ` hch
2019-12-04 13:03 make dma_addressing_limited work for memory encryption setups v2 Christoph Hellwig
2019-12-04 13:03 ` [PATCH 2/2] dma-mapping: force unencryped devices are always addressing limited Christoph Hellwig
2019-12-06 14:10 ` Thomas Hellstrom
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=MN2PR05MB6141B6D7E28A146EBF9CE79FA1470@MN2PR05MB6141.namprd05.prod.outlook.com \
--to=thellstrom@vmware.com \
--cc=christian.koenig@amd.com \
--cc=hch@lst.de \
--cc=iommu@lists.linux-foundation.org \
--cc=konrad.wilk@oracle.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=thomas.lendacky@amd.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 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).