lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2021]   [Jun]   [22]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH v3] media: uvc: don't do DMA on stack
On Tue, Jun 22, 2021 at 02:21:27PM +0000, David Laight wrote:
> From: Alan Stern
> > Sent: 22 June 2021 14:29
> ...
> > > Thought...
> > >
> > > Is kmalloc(1, GFP_KERNEL) guaranteed to return a pointer into
> > > a cache line that will not be accessed by any other code?
> > > (This is slightly weaker than requiring a cache-line aligned
> > > pointer - but very similar.)
> >
> > As I understand it, on architectures that do not have cache-coherent
> > I/O, kmalloc is guaranteed to return a buffer that is
> > cacheline-aligned and whose length is a multiple of the cacheline
> > size.
> >
> > Now, whether that buffer ends up being accessed by any other code
> > depends on what your driver does with the pointer it gets from
> > kmalloc. :-)
>
> Thanks for the clarification.
>
> Most of the small allocates in the usb stack are for transmits
> where it is only necessary to ensure a cache write-back.
>
> I know there has been some confusion because one of the
> allocators can add a small header to every allocation.
> This can lead to unexpectedly inadequately aligned pointers.
> If it is updated when the preceding block is freed (as some
> user-space mallocs do) then it would need to be in a
> completely separate cache line.

If you really want to find out what the true story is, you should ask
on the linux-mm mailing list. The rest of us are not experts on this
stuff.

Alan Stern

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2021-06-22 21:59    [W:0.068 / U:0.976 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site