From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: joro@8bytes.org (Joerg Roedel) Date: Tue, 5 Apr 2016 15:33:10 +0200 Subject: [PATCH 1/2] iommu/dma: Restore scatterlist offsets correctly In-Reply-To: <5703B98A.6010200@arm.com> References: <20160405125926.GI17838@8bytes.org> <5703B98A.6010200@arm.com> Message-ID: <20160405133310.GA9516@8bytes.org> To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org On Tue, Apr 05, 2016 at 02:11:38PM +0100, Robin Murphy wrote: > On 05/04/16 13:59, Joerg Roedel wrote: > >On Thu, Mar 10, 2016 at 07:28:12PM +0000, Robin Murphy wrote: > >>With the change to stashing just the IOVA-page-aligned remainder of the > >>CPU-page offset rather than the whole thing, the failure path in > >>__invalidate_sg() also needs tweaking to account for that in the case of > >>differing page sizes where the two offsets may not be equivalent. > >>Similarly in __finalise_sg(), lest the architecture-specific wrappers > >>later get the wrong address for cache maintenance on sync or unmap. > >> > >>Fixes: 164afb1d85b8 ("iommu/dma: Use correct offset in map_sg") > >>Reported-by: Magnus Damm > >>Signed-off-by: Robin Murphy > > > >Cc: stable at ver.kernel.org # v4.4+ ? > > Good point - the kind of people using 64k pages are also likely to > be the ones sticking to stable kernels. Are you able to handle that, > or would you like me to resend? I added the tag and put the commit into my iommu/fixes branch. Can you re-send me the second commit when the first is upstream (I'll send the pull-req this week)? I'd like to avoid creating an additional merge-commit just for this patch. Joerg