Hi Christoph, On Mon, Apr 09, 2018 at 10:52:51AM -0700, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > On Mon, Apr 09, 2018 at 06:59:08PM +0200, Jacopo Mondi wrote: > > I'm still a bit puzzled on what happens if dma_mmap_from_dev_coherent() > > fails. > > Does a dma_mmap_from_dev_coherent() failure guarantee anyhow that the > > successive virt_to_page() isn't problematic as it is today? > > Or is it the > > if (off < count && user_count <= (count - off)) > > check that makes the translation safe? > > It doesn't. I think one major issue is that we should not simply fall > to dma_common_mmap if no method is required, but need every instance of > dma_map_ops to explicitly opt into an mmap method that is known to work.
I see.. this patch thus just postpones the problem...
>
> > #ifndef CONFIG_ARCH_NO_COHERENT_DMA_MMAP
> > unsigned long user_count = vma_pages(vma);
> > unsigned long count = PAGE_ALIGN(size) >> PAGE_SHIFT;
> > - unsigned long pfn = page_to_pfn(virt_to_page(cpu_addr));
> > unsigned long off = vma->vm_pgoff;
> > + unsigned long pfn;
> >
> > vma->vm_page_prot = pgprot_noncached(vma->vm_page_prot);
> >
> > @@ -235,6 +235,7 @@ int dma_common_mmap(struct device *dev, struct
> > vm_area_struct *vma,
> > return ret;
> >
> > if (off < count && user_count <= (count - off)) {
> > + pfn = page_to_pfn(virt_to_page(cpu_addr));
> > ret = remap_pfn_range(vma, vma->vm_start,
> > pfn + off,
> > user_count << PAGE_SHIFT,
>
> Why not:
>
> ret = remap_pfn_range(vma, vma->vm_start,
> page_to_pfn(virt_to_page(cpu_addr)) + off,
>
> and save the temp variable?
Sure, it's better... Should I send a v2 or considering your above
comment this patch is just a mitigation and should be ditched in
favour of a proper solution (which requires a much more considerable amount
of work though)?
Thanks
j
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
