From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from smtp.codeaurora.org by pdx-caf-mail.web.codeaurora.org (Dovecot) with LMTP id L5HMN0F1GlueXAAAmS7hNA ; Fri, 08 Jun 2018 12:24:16 +0000 Received: by smtp.codeaurora.org (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 39CD1608B8; Fri, 8 Jun 2018 12:24:16 +0000 (UTC) X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on pdx-caf-mail.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.9 required=2.0 tests=BAYES_00,MAILING_LIST_MULTI autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by smtp.codeaurora.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 97E85606FA; Fri, 8 Jun 2018 12:24:15 +0000 (UTC) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 smtp.codeaurora.org 97E85606FA Authentication-Results: pdx-caf-mail.web.codeaurora.org; dmarc=fail (p=none dis=none) header.from=codethink.co.uk Authentication-Results: pdx-caf-mail.web.codeaurora.org; spf=none smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752712AbeFHMYM (ORCPT + 25 others); Fri, 8 Jun 2018 08:24:12 -0400 Received: from imap1.codethink.co.uk ([176.9.8.82]:51820 "EHLO imap1.codethink.co.uk" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751251AbeFHMYK (ORCPT ); Fri, 8 Jun 2018 08:24:10 -0400 Received: from shadbolt.e.decadent.org.uk ([88.96.1.126] helo=xylophone) by imap1.codethink.co.uk with esmtpsa (Exim 4.84_2 #1 (Debian)) id 1fRGR6-0005ok-BS; Fri, 08 Jun 2018 13:24:08 +0100 Message-ID: <1528460647.2289.85.camel@codethink.co.uk> Subject: Re: [PATCH 4.4 010/268] xen-swiotlb: fix the check condition for xen_swiotlb_free_coherent From: Ben Hutchings To: Joe Jin , John Sobecki , Rzeszutek Wilk Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org, Greg Kroah-Hartman , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Date: Fri, 08 Jun 2018 13:24:07 +0100 In-Reply-To: <90be58ac-fd9a-abb1-3bf6-8f5001c39a0b@oracle.com> References: <20180528100202.045206534@linuxfoundation.org> <20180528100203.277622038@linuxfoundation.org> <1528403323.2289.84.camel@codethink.co.uk> <90be58ac-fd9a-abb1-3bf6-8f5001c39a0b@oracle.com> Organization: Codethink Ltd. Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" X-Mailer: Evolution 3.22.6-1+deb9u1 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Thu, 2018-06-07 at 13:59 -0700, Joe Jin wrote: > On 6/7/18 1:28 PM, Ben Hutchings wrote: > > On Mon, 2018-05-28 at 11:59 +0200, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote: > > > 4.4-stable review patch.  If anyone has any objections, please let me know. > > > > > > ------------------ > > > > > > From: Joe Jin > > > > > > commit 4855c92dbb7b3b85c23e88ab7ca04f99b9677b41 upstream. > > > > > > When run raidconfig from Dom0 we found that the Xen DMA heap is reduced, > > > but Dom Heap is increased by the same size. Tracing raidconfig we found > > > that the related ioctl() in megaraid_sas will call dma_alloc_coherent() > > > to apply memory. If the memory allocated by Dom0 is not in the DMA area, > > > it will exchange memory with Xen to meet the requiment. Later drivers > > > call dma_free_coherent() to free the memory, on xen_swiotlb_free_coherent() > > > the check condition (dev_addr + size - 1 <= dma_mask) is always false, > > > > I think this was meant to say (dev_addr + size - 1 > dma_mask), i.e. > > Hi Ben, > > Yes you are right, sorry I made the mistake, thanks for catch it. > Is there any way to fix description from git repo? No there isn't, but that wasn't my main point. Please address the rest of my message. Ben. > Regards, > Joe > > > the condition that is replaced by this commit.  If that's always false, > > the new condition (the logical inverse) must always be true. > > > > [...] > > > --- a/drivers/xen/swiotlb-xen.c > > > +++ b/drivers/xen/swiotlb-xen.c > > > @@ -359,7 +359,7 @@ xen_swiotlb_free_coherent(struct device > > >    * physical address */ > > >   phys = xen_bus_to_phys(dev_addr); > > >   > > > - if (((dev_addr + size - 1 > dma_mask)) || > > > + if (((dev_addr + size - 1 <= dma_mask)) || > > >       range_straddles_page_boundary(phys, size)) > > >   xen_destroy_contiguous_region(phys, order); > > >   > > > > So now we will always call xen_destroy_contiguous_region(), whether or > > not xen_create_contiguous_region() was called during allocation.  Is > > that really the intent?  If so, the entire condition could be removed > > to make this clear. > > > > Alternately, if the commit message is correct, the condition could be > > simplified to range_straddles_page_boundary(...). > > > > But I'm not at all convinced that either of these is correct.  It seems > > like you need to either find a way of distinguishing between memory > > allocated with or without the use of xen_create_contiguous_region(), or > > to use it unconditionally. > > > > Ben. > > > > -- Ben Hutchings, Software Developer   Codethink Ltd https://www.codethink.co.uk/ Dale House, 35 Dale Street Manchester, M1 2HF, United Kingdom