On Fri, 23 Jul 2021 20:27:56 -0400
Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk <konrad@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Sat, Jul 24, 2021 at 01:17:46AM +0200, Halil Pasic wrote:
> > Since commit 903cd0f315fe ("swiotlb: Use is_swiotlb_force_bounce for
> > swiotlb data bouncing") if code sets swiotlb_force it needs to do so
> > before the swiotlb is initialised. Otherwise
> > io_tlb_default_mem->force_bounce will not get set to true, and devices
> > that use (the default) swiotlb will not bounce despite switolb_force
> > having the value of SWIOTLB_FORCE.
> >
> > Let us restore swiotlb functionality for PV by fulfilling this new
> > requirement.
> >
> > This change addresses what turned out to be a fragility in
> > commit 64e1f0c531d1 ("s390/mm: force swiotlb for protected
> > virtualization"), which ain't exactly broken in its original context,
> > but could give us some more headache if people backport the broken
> > change and forget this fix.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Halil Pasic <pasic@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > Tested-by: Christian Borntraeger <borntraeger@xxxxxxxxxx>
> > Reviewed-by: Christian Borntraeger <borntraeger@xxxxxxxxxx>
> > Fixes: 903cd0f315fe ("swiotlb: Use is_swiotlb_force_bounce for swiotlb data bouncing")
> > Fixes: 64e1f0c531d1 ("s390/mm: force swiotlb for protected virtualization")
> > Cc: stable@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx #5.3+
> >
> > ---
>
> Picked it up and stuck it in linux-next with the other set of patches (Will's fixes).
Thanks!
