Hi, Christoph.
On Wed, 2019-12-04 at 14:03 +0100, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> Devices that are forced to DMA through swiotlb need to be treated as
> if
> they are addressing limited.
>
> Signed-off-by: Christoph Hellwig
> ---
> include/linux/dma-direct.h | 1 +
> kernel/dma/direct.c| 8
On 11/28/19 8:51 AM, h...@lst.de wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 27, 2019 at 06:22:57PM +, Thomas Hellstrom wrote:
>>> bool dma_addressing_limited(struct device *dev)
>>> {
>>> + if (force_dma_unencrypted(dev))
>>> + return true;
>>> return min_not_zero(dma_get_mask(dev), dev->bus_dma_li
Hi,
On Wed, 2019-11-27 at 15:40 +0100, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> Devices that are forced to DMA through unencrypted bounce buffers
> need to be treated as if they are addressing limited.
>
> Signed-off-by: Christoph Hellwig
> ---
> kernel/dma/mapping.c | 2 ++
> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+)
Hi, Christoph,
On Mon, 2019-04-22 at 19:56 +0200, h...@lst.de wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 10, 2019 at 03:01:14PM +, Thomas Hellstrom wrote:
> > > So can you please respin a version acceptable to you and submit
> > > it
> > > for 5.1 ASAP? Otherwise I'll need to move ahead with the simple
> > > rever
On Wed, 2019-04-10 at 08:43 +0200, h...@lst.de wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 09, 2019 at 05:24:48PM +, Thomas Hellstrom wrote:
> > > Note that this only affects external, untrusted devices. But
> > > that
> > > may include eGPU,
> >
> > What about discrete graphics cards, like Radeon and Nvidia? Who
>
On Tue, 2019-04-09 at 17:25 +0200, h...@lst.de wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 09, 2019 at 02:17:40PM +, Thomas Hellstrom wrote:
> > If that's the case, I think most of the graphics drivers will stop
> > functioning. I don't think people would want that, and even if the
> > graphics drivers are "to blame"
On Tue, 2019-04-09 at 15:31 +0200, h...@lst.de wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 09, 2019 at 01:04:51PM +, Thomas Hellstrom wrote:
> > On the VMware platform we have two possible vIOMMUS, the AMD iommu
> > and
> > Intel VTD, Given those conditions I belive the patch is
> > functionally
> > correct. We can't
On Tue, 2019-04-09 at 11:57 +0200, h...@lst.de wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 08, 2019 at 06:47:52PM +, Thomas Hellstrom wrote:
> > We HAVE discussed our needs, although admittedly some of my emails
> > ended up unanswered.
>
> And than you haven't followed up, and instead ignored the layering
> instruc
On Mon, 2019-04-08 at 12:55 +0200, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> This reverts commit 9ddac734aa310c5fbc0ec93602335d2a39092451.
IMHO, rather than reverting, I'd like to see the dma API provide a
function telling us whether streaming DMA operations are coherent or
not.
With that we could fix all driv
Christoph,
On Mon, 2019-04-08 at 12:55 +0200, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> Hi Linus,
>
> unfortunately it took less than a merge window for the:
>
> /*
> * All the dma_direct_* declarations are here just for the indirect
> call bypass,
> * and must not be used directly drivers!
> */
>
> warni
10 matches
Mail list logo
