drivers/iommu/iommu-debug-pagealloc.c | 31 ++++++++++++--------------- include/linux/page_ext.h | 6 ++++++ mm/page_ext.c | 23 ++++++++++++++++++++ 3 files changed, 43 insertions(+), 17 deletions(-)
This is a small fix for the new config IOMMU_DEBUG_PAGEALLOC based on the discussion: https://lore.kernel.org/linux-iommu/CAFgf54pBAUm3ao-UJksiuGKtvv4wzRyFq_uKwLe0H1ettO4DLQ@mail.gmail.com/ Where it was concluded that pfn_valid() is not enough to validate physical addresses before access to page_ext. The first patch introduces a new function in page_ext that takes a physical address as an argument, and the second patch uses it instead of calling pfn_valid() and phys_to_page() Benchmarks with the new implementation can be found in: https://lore.kernel.org/linux-iommu/20260114164322.787125-1-smostafa@google.com/ This series applies to iommu/core tree. Mostafa Saleh (2): mm/page_ext: Add page_ext_get_phys() iommu: debug-pagealloc: Use page_ext_get_phys() drivers/iommu/iommu-debug-pagealloc.c | 31 ++++++++++++--------------- include/linux/page_ext.h | 6 ++++++ mm/page_ext.c | 23 ++++++++++++++++++++ 3 files changed, 43 insertions(+), 17 deletions(-) -- 2.52.0.457.g6b5491de43-goog
On 1/19/26 15:22, Mostafa Saleh wrote: > This is a small fix for the new config IOMMU_DEBUG_PAGEALLOC based > on the discussion: > https://lore.kernel.org/linux-iommu/CAFgf54pBAUm3ao-UJksiuGKtvv4wzRyFq_uKwLe0H1ettO4DLQ@mail.gmail.com/ > > Where it was concluded that pfn_valid() is not enough to validate > physical addresses before access to page_ext. > > The first patch introduces a new function in page_ext that takes a > physical address as an argument, and the second patch uses it instead > of calling pfn_valid() and phys_to_page() > > Benchmarks with the new implementation can be found in: > https://lore.kernel.org/linux-iommu/20260114164322.787125-1-smostafa@google.com/ > > This series applies to iommu/core tree. This is part of v7 [1], right? Can't we just apply v7 instead or are the commit IDs already stable? [1] https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20260114164322.787125-1-smostafa@google.com -- Cheers David
On Mon, Jan 19, 2026 at 2:27 PM David Hildenbrand (Red Hat) <david@kernel.org> wrote: > > On 1/19/26 15:22, Mostafa Saleh wrote: > > This is a small fix for the new config IOMMU_DEBUG_PAGEALLOC based > > on the discussion: > > https://lore.kernel.org/linux-iommu/CAFgf54pBAUm3ao-UJksiuGKtvv4wzRyFq_uKwLe0H1ettO4DLQ@mail.gmail.com/ > > > > Where it was concluded that pfn_valid() is not enough to validate > > physical addresses before access to page_ext. > > > > The first patch introduces a new function in page_ext that takes a > > physical address as an argument, and the second patch uses it instead > > of calling pfn_valid() and phys_to_page() > > > > Benchmarks with the new implementation can be found in: > > https://lore.kernel.org/linux-iommu/20260114164322.787125-1-smostafa@google.com/ > > > > This series applies to iommu/core tree. > > This is part of v7 [1], right? Can't we just apply v7 instead or are the > commit IDs already stable? > It should be stable according to Will: https://lore.kernel.org/linux-iommu/20260114164322.787125-1-smostafa@google.com/T/#m59d0b455e3f2160cb6f9980a0ae65bc481c53898 Thanks, Mostafa > [1] https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20260114164322.787125-1-smostafa@google.com > > -- > Cheers > > David
On 1/19/26 16:09, Mostafa Saleh wrote: > On Mon, Jan 19, 2026 at 2:27 PM David Hildenbrand (Red Hat) > <david@kernel.org> wrote: >> >> On 1/19/26 15:22, Mostafa Saleh wrote: >>> This is a small fix for the new config IOMMU_DEBUG_PAGEALLOC based >>> on the discussion: >>> https://lore.kernel.org/linux-iommu/CAFgf54pBAUm3ao-UJksiuGKtvv4wzRyFq_uKwLe0H1ettO4DLQ@mail.gmail.com/ >>> >>> Where it was concluded that pfn_valid() is not enough to validate >>> physical addresses before access to page_ext. >>> >>> The first patch introduces a new function in page_ext that takes a >>> physical address as an argument, and the second patch uses it instead >>> of calling pfn_valid() and phys_to_page() >>> >>> Benchmarks with the new implementation can be found in: >>> https://lore.kernel.org/linux-iommu/20260114164322.787125-1-smostafa@google.com/ >>> >>> This series applies to iommu/core tree. >> >> This is part of v7 [1], right? Can't we just apply v7 instead or are the >> commit IDs already stable? >> > > It should be stable according to Will: > https://lore.kernel.org/linux-iommu/20260114164322.787125-1-smostafa@google.com/T/#m59d0b455e3f2160cb6f9980a0ae65bc481c53898 Shame, probably applied a bit too fast ... -- Cheers David
© 2016 - 2026 Red Hat, Inc.