On 2022-06-23 08:00, Dexuan Cui wrote:
From: Christoph Hellwig <h...@lst.de>
Sent: Wednesday, June 22, 2022 10:44 PM
To: Dexuan Cui <de...@microsoft.com>
On Wed, Jun 22, 2022 at 12:14:24PM -0700, Dexuan Cui wrote:
The third parameter of dma_set_encrypted() is a size in bytes rather than
the number of pages.

Fixes: 4d0564785bb0 ("dma-direct: factor out dma_set_{de,en}crypted
Signed-off-by: Dexuan Cui <de...@microsoft.com>


commit 4a37f3dd9a83186cb88d44808ab35b78375082c9 (tag:
Author: Robin Murphy <robin.mur...@arm.com>
Date:   Fri May 20 18:10:13 2022 +0100

     dma-direct: don't over-decrypt memory

It looks like commit 4a37f3dd9a831 fixed a different issue?

Here my patch is for the latest mainline:

In dma_direct_alloc()'s error handling path, we pass 'size' to 
          if (dma_set_encrypted(dev, page_address(page), size))

However, in dma_direct_free(), we pass ' 1 << page_order ' to 
I think the ' 1 << page_order' is incorrect and it should be 'size' as well?

I think technically you're both right - these instances clearly have a history tracing back to the original bug that my patch addressed, but the refactoring then made them into their own distinct bug in terms of the internal dma_set_encrypted() interface, per the commit message here. Apparently I failed to spot this when forward-porting 4a37f3dd9a831 from 5.10 (as the commit message says, don't ask... ;) ) - I guess I was only looking at where the set_memory_*() callsites had moved to. For this patch,

Reviewed-by: Robin Murphy <robin.mur...@arm.com>

iommu mailing list

Reply via email to