> On 2021-01-11 15:43, Marc Orr wrote:
minus sta...@vger.kernel.org, per gregkh@'s email.
> > diff --git a/kernel/dma/direct.c b/kernel/dma/direct.c
> > index 0a4881e59aa7..3d9b17fe5771 100644
> > --- a/kernel/dma/direct.c
> > +++ b/kernel/dma/direct.c
> > @@ -374,9 +374,11 @@ void dma_direct_unmap_sg(struct device *dev, struct
> > scatterlist *sgl,
> > struct scatterlist *sg;
> > int i;
> >
> > - for_each_sg(sgl, sg, nents, i)
> > + for_each_sg(sgl, sg, nents, i) {
> > dma_direct_unmap_page(dev, sg->dma_address, sg_dma_len(sg),
> > dir,
> > attrs);
> > + sg->dma_address = DMA_MAPPING_ERROR;
>
> There are more DMA API backends than just dma-direct, so while this
> might help paper over bugs when SWIOTLB is in use, it's not going to
> have any effect when those same bugs are hit under other circumstances.
> Once again, the moral of the story is that effort is better spent just
> fixing the bugs ;)
Thanks for the quick feedback. What is the correct fix? I understand
the first half. The NVMe driver should be updated to not call unmap on
an address that has already been unmapped within the DMA direct code.
Where I'm less certain is how to communicate to the NVMe driver that
the mapping failed. In particular, the NVMe code explicitly checks if
the first DMA address in the scatter/gather list is set to
DMA_MAPPING_ERROR. Thus, don't we need to update the DMA direct code
to propagate DMA_MAPPING_ERROR back up to the driver, via the
scatter/gather struct?
I skimmed arch/arm/mm/dma-mapping.c, just now. I can see that this
code sets the address within the scatter/gather struct to
DMA_MAPPING_ERROR before trying to map an IO address and write it into
the struct. Is this a good example to follow?
Thanks,
Marc
_______________________________________________
iommu mailing list
iommu@lists.linux-foundation.org
https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/iommu
