From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S933513AbcLMOye (ORCPT ); Tue, 13 Dec 2016 09:54:34 -0500 Received: from smtp.codeaurora.org ([198.145.29.96]:47486 "EHLO smtp.codeaurora.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S932319AbcLMOyc (ORCPT ); Tue, 13 Dec 2016 09:54:32 -0500 DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.1 smtp.codeaurora.org 1E2AE6120F Authentication-Results: pdx-caf-mail.web.codeaurora.org; dmarc=none header.from=codeaurora.org Authentication-Results: pdx-caf-mail.web.codeaurora.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=sricharan@codeaurora.org From: "Sricharan" To: "'Robin Murphy'" , , , , , , , , , , , , Cc: References: <1481567927-14791-1-git-send-email-sricharan@codeaurora.org> <1481567927-14791-6-git-send-email-sricharan@codeaurora.org> <7d09fc5a-9425-c171-e469-2759534de2dc@arm.com> <002301d2554e$89112d20$9b338760$@codeaurora.org> <4e6ebf88-0138-afce-d752-56b66d69772f@arm.com> In-Reply-To: <4e6ebf88-0138-afce-d752-56b66d69772f@arm.com> Subject: RE: [PATCH V7 5/8] arm64/dma-mapping: Implement DMA_ATTR_PRIVILEGED Date: Tue, 13 Dec 2016 20:24:17 +0530 Message-ID: <002501d25550$ccf29400$66d7bc00$@codeaurora.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 15.0 Thread-Index: AQFZUv9VtjwIg7SpHMwZgdo4EMFvTQECDnD7AOVXdVQCh86Q7AE3tQONocrD43A= Content-Language: en-us Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Hi, > >On 13/12/16 14:38, Sricharan wrote: >> Hi Robin, >> >>> -----Original Message----- >>> From: linux-arm-kernel [mailto:linux-arm-kernel-bounces@lists.infradead.org] On Behalf Of Robin Murphy >>> Sent: Tuesday, December 13, 2016 7:33 PM >>> To: Sricharan R ; jcrouse@codeaurora.org; pdaly@codeaurora.org; jgebben@codeaurora.org; >>> joro@8bytes.org; linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org; pratikp@codeaurora.org; iommu@lists.linux-foundation.org; >tzeng@codeaurora.org; >>> linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org; will.deacon@arm.com; mitchelh@codeaurora.org; vinod.koul@intel.com >>> Cc: dan.j.williams@intel.com >>> Subject: Re: [PATCH V7 5/8] arm64/dma-mapping: Implement DMA_ATTR_PRIVILEGED >>> >>> On 12/12/16 18:38, Sricharan R wrote: >>>> From: Mitchel Humpherys >>>> >>>> The newly added DMA_ATTR_PRIVILEGED is useful for creating mappings that >>>> are only accessible to privileged DMA engines. Implement it in >>>> dma-iommu.c so that the ARM64 DMA IOMMU mapper can make use of it. >>>> >>>> Reviewed-by: Robin Murphy >>>> Tested-by: Robin Murphy >>>> Acked-by: Will Deacon >>>> Signed-off-by: Mitchel Humpherys >>>> --- >>>> arch/arm64/mm/dma-mapping.c | 6 +++--- >>>> drivers/iommu/dma-iommu.c | 10 ++++++++-- >>>> include/linux/dma-iommu.h | 3 ++- >>>> 3 files changed, 13 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-) >>>> >>>> diff --git a/arch/arm64/mm/dma-mapping.c b/arch/arm64/mm/dma-mapping.c >>>> index 401f79a..ae76ead 100644 >>>> --- a/arch/arm64/mm/dma-mapping.c >>>> +++ b/arch/arm64/mm/dma-mapping.c >>>> @@ -557,7 +557,7 @@ static void *__iommu_alloc_attrs(struct device *dev, size_t size, >>>> unsigned long attrs) >>>> { >>>> bool coherent = is_device_dma_coherent(dev); >>>> - int ioprot = dma_direction_to_prot(DMA_BIDIRECTIONAL, coherent); >>>> + int ioprot = dma_info_to_prot(DMA_BIDIRECTIONAL, coherent, attrs); >>>> size_t iosize = size; >>>> void *addr; >>>> >>>> @@ -711,7 +711,7 @@ static dma_addr_t __iommu_map_page(struct device *dev, struct page *page, >>>> unsigned long attrs) >>>> { >>>> bool coherent = is_device_dma_coherent(dev); >>>> - int prot = dma_direction_to_prot(dir, coherent); >>>> + int prot = dma_info_to_prot(dir, coherent, attrs); >>>> dma_addr_t dev_addr = iommu_dma_map_page(dev, page, offset, size, prot); >>>> >>>> if (!iommu_dma_mapping_error(dev, dev_addr) && >>>> @@ -769,7 +769,7 @@ static int __iommu_map_sg_attrs(struct device *dev, struct scatterlist *sgl, >>>> __iommu_sync_sg_for_device(dev, sgl, nelems, dir); >>>> >>>> return iommu_dma_map_sg(dev, sgl, nelems, >>>> - dma_direction_to_prot(dir, coherent)); >>>> + dma_info_to_prot(dir, coherent, attrs)); >>>> } >>>> >>>> static void __iommu_unmap_sg_attrs(struct device *dev, >>>> diff --git a/drivers/iommu/dma-iommu.c b/drivers/iommu/dma-iommu.c >>>> index d2a7a46..756d5e0 100644 >>>> --- a/drivers/iommu/dma-iommu.c >>>> +++ b/drivers/iommu/dma-iommu.c >>>> @@ -182,16 +182,22 @@ int iommu_dma_init_domain(struct iommu_domain *domain, dma_addr_t base, >>>> EXPORT_SYMBOL(iommu_dma_init_domain); >>>> >>>> /** >>>> - * dma_direction_to_prot - Translate DMA API directions to IOMMU API page flags >>>> + * dma_info_to_prot - Translate DMA API directions and attributes to IOMMU API >>>> + * page flags. >>>> * @dir: Direction of DMA transfer >>>> * @coherent: Is the DMA master cache-coherent? >>>> + * @attrs: DMA attributes for the mapping >>>> * >>>> * Return: corresponding IOMMU API page protection flags >>>> */ >>>> -int dma_direction_to_prot(enum dma_data_direction dir, bool coherent) >>>> +int dma_info_to_prot(enum dma_data_direction dir, bool coherent, >>>> + unsigned long attrs) >>>> { >>>> int prot = coherent ? IOMMU_CACHE : 0; >>>> >>>> + if (attrs & DMA_ATTR_PRIVILEGED) >>>> + prot |= IOMMU_PRIV; >>>> + >>>> switch (dir) { >>>> case DMA_BIDIRECTIONAL: >>>> return prot | IOMMU_READ | IOMMU_WRITE; >>> >>> ...and applying against -next now also needs this hunk: >>> >>> @@ -639,7 +639,7 @@ dma_addr_t iommu_dma_map_resource(struct device >>> *dev, phys_addr_t phys, >>> size_t size, enum dma_data_direction dir, unsigned long attrs) >>> { >>> return __iommu_dma_map(dev, phys, size, >>> - dma_direction_to_prot(dir, false) | IOMMU_MMIO); >>> + dma_info_to_prot(dir, false, attrs) | IOMMU_MMIO); >>> } >>> >>> void iommu_dma_unmap_resource(struct device *dev, dma_addr_t handle, >>> >>> With those two issues fixed up, I've given the series (applied to >>> next-20161213) a spin on a SMMUv3/PL330 fast model and it still checks out. >>> >> >> oops, sorry that i missed this in rebase. I can repost now with this fixed, >> 'checks out' you mean something is not working correct ? > >No, I mean it _is_ still correct - I guess that's more of an idiom than >I thought :) > ha ok, thanks for the testing as well. I will just send a v8 with those two fixed now. Regards, Sricharan