Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel+bounces-42292-linux.lists.archive=gmail.com@vger.kernel.org designates 139.178.88.99 as permitted sender) client-ip=139.178.88.99;
Date: Mon, 29 Jan 2024 08:43:26 +0100
From: Petr =?UTF-8?B?VGVzYcWZw61r?= <petr@tesarici.cz>
To: Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>
Cc: Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
 kernel-team@android.com, iommu@lists.linux.dev, Marek Szyprowski
 <m.szyprowski@samsung.com>, Robin Murphy <robin.murphy@arm.com>, Petr
 Tesarik <petr.tesarik1@huawei-partners.com>, Dexuan Cui
 <decui@microsoft.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] swiotlb: Enforce page alignment in swiotlb_alloc()
Message-ID: <20240129084326.4667af6a@meshulam.tesarici.cz>
In-Reply-To: <20240129060853.GB19258@lst.de>
References: <20240126151956.10014-1-will@kernel.org>
	<20240126151956.10014-3-will@kernel.org>
	<20240129060853.GB19258@lst.de>
Precedence: bulk
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

On Mon, 29 Jan 2024 07:08:53 +0100
Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de> wrote:

> On Fri, Jan 26, 2024 at 03:19:56PM +0000, Will Deacon wrote:
> > diff --git a/kernel/dma/swiotlb.c b/kernel/dma/swiotlb.c
> > index 25febb9e670c..92433ea9f2d2 100644
> > --- a/kernel/dma/swiotlb.c
> > +++ b/kernel/dma/swiotlb.c
> > @@ -1647,6 +1647,12 @@ struct page *swiotlb_alloc(struct device *dev, size_t size)
> >  		return NULL;
> >  
> >  	tlb_addr = slot_addr(pool->start, index);
> > +	if (!PAGE_ALIGNED(tlb_addr)) {
> > +		dev_WARN_ONCE(dev, 1, "Cannot return 'struct page *' for non page-aligned swiotlb addr 0x%pa.\n",
> > +			      &tlb_addr);
> > +		swiotlb_release_slots(dev, tlb_addr);
> > +		return NULL;
> > +	}
> >  
> >  	return pfn_to_page(PFN_DOWN(tlb_addr));  
> 
> So PFN_DOWN aligns the address and thus per se converting the unaligned
> address isn't a problem.  That being said swiotlb obviously should never
> allocate unaligned addresses, but the placement of this check feels
> odd to me.  Also because it only catches swiotlb_alloc and not the
> map side.

We may have to rethink how alignment constraints are interpreted. See
also my reply to PATCH 1/2.

> Maybe just throw a WARN_ON_ONCE into slot_addr() ?

Yes.

Or, what if I write a KUnit test suite for swiotlb to combat this
constant stream of various regressions?

Petr T