Re: [RFC PATCH 3/4] dma-direct: Add API to preserve/restore allocations
From: Pranjal Shrivastava
Date: Mon Jun 08 2026 - 15:59:59 EST
On Tue, May 05, 2026 at 12:27:36AM +0000, Samiullah Khawaja wrote:
> Add an API to preserve/restore the DMA direct allocation for liveupdate.
> The underlying memory is preserved/restored using KHO. During restore
> the memory is setup based on the device configuration, gfp flags and
> allocation attributes. Once restored, the driver can use the usual
> dma_free* API to deallocate the restored DMA allocation.
>
> This API will be used to add support in dma_alloc* APIs to
> preseve/restore the DMA allocations.
>
> Signed-off-by: Samiullah Khawaja <skhawaja@xxxxxxxxxx>
> ---
> include/linux/dma-direct.h | 29 +++++++
> kernel/dma/Kconfig | 3 +
> kernel/dma/direct.c | 163 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> 3 files changed, 195 insertions(+)
>
[...]
> diff --git a/kernel/dma/Kconfig b/kernel/dma/Kconfig
> index bfef21b4a9ae..d92852942c6c 100644
> --- a/kernel/dma/Kconfig
> +++ b/kernel/dma/Kconfig
> @@ -265,3 +265,6 @@ config DMA_MAP_BENCHMARK
> performance of dma_(un)map_page.
>
> See tools/testing/selftests/dma/dma_map_benchmark.c
> +
> +config DMA_LIVEUPDATE
> + bool "Enable preservation of DMA direct allocations"
Nit: depends on LIVEUPDATE?
> diff --git a/kernel/dma/direct.c b/kernel/dma/direct.c
> index ec887f443741..c2b98f91900a 100644
> --- a/kernel/dma/direct.c
> +++ b/kernel/dma/direct.c
> @@ -6,6 +6,8 @@
> */
> #include <linux/memblock.h> /* for max_pfn */
> #include <linux/export.h>
> +#include <linux/kexec_handover.h>
> +#include <linux/kho/abi/dma_alloc.h>
> #include <linux/mm.h>
> #include <linux/dma-map-ops.h>
> #include <linux/scatterlist.h>
> @@ -307,6 +309,167 @@ void *dma_direct_alloc(struct device *dev, size_t size,
> return NULL;
> }
>
> +#ifdef CONFIG_DMA_LIVEUPDATE
> +int dma_direct_preserve_allocation(struct device *dev, void *cpu_addr,
> + size_t size, dma_addr_t dma_handle,
> + unsigned long attrs, u64 *state)
> +{
> + struct dma_alloc_ser *ser;
> + int ret;
> +
> + if (!kho_is_enabled())
> + return -EOPNOTSUPP;
> +
> + if (IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_DMA_CMA))
> + return -EOPNOTSUPP;
> +
> + if ((attrs & DMA_ATTR_NO_KERNEL_MAPPING) &&
> + !force_dma_unencrypted(dev) && !is_swiotlb_for_alloc(dev))
> + return -EOPNOTSUPP;
> +
> + if (IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_ARCH_HAS_DMA_ALLOC) &&
> + !dev_is_dma_coherent(dev) &&
> + !is_swiotlb_for_alloc(dev))
> + return -EOPNOTSUPP;
> +
> + if (IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_DMA_GLOBAL_POOL) &&
> + !dev_is_dma_coherent(dev))
> + return -EOPNOTSUPP;
> +
> + if (IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_DMA_COHERENT_POOL) &&
> + dma_is_from_pool(dev, cpu_addr, PAGE_ALIGN(size)))
> + return -EOPNOTSUPP;
> +
> + ser = kho_alloc_preserve(sizeof(*ser));
> + if (IS_ERR(ser))
> + return PTR_ERR(ser);
> +
> + ser->page_phys = dma_to_phys(dev, dma_handle);
> + ser->force_decrypted = force_dma_unencrypted(dev);
> + ser->size = size;
> +
> + ret = kho_preserve_pages(phys_to_page(ser->page_phys),
> + size >> PAGE_SHIFT);
Should this be `PAGE_ALIGN(size) >> PAGE_SHIFT` OR
`DIV_ROUND_UP(size, PAGE_SIZE)`?
Otherwise, if size is small, say, size == 64-bytes, we preserve 0 pages?
Also, IIRC, even with PAGE_ALIGN, preserving just the requested pgcount
is not enough because buddy allocator allocates in order-N.
For e.g. if a driver requests 20KB (5 pages), the buddy allocator
fulfills it with an order-3 block (8 pages).
Now, if we only tell KHO to preserve 5 pages, the remaining 3 pages are
free in the new kernel. When the driver eventually tears down and calls
dma_free_coherent(), dma_direct_free() will call
__free_pages(page, get_order(size)), which will attempt to free all 8
pages, causing a double-free panic on the 3 unpreserved pages?
Should we be preserving exactly 1 << get_order(size) pages as per buddy?
Same applies to unpreserve, and restore.
> + if (ret) {
> + kho_unpreserve_free(ser);
> + return ret;
> + }
> +
> + *state = virt_to_phys(ser);
> + return 0;
> +}
> +
> +void dma_direct_unpreserve_allocation(struct device *dev, u64 state)
> +{
> + struct dma_alloc_ser *ser;
> +
> + if (!kho_is_enabled())
> + return;
> +
> + ser = phys_to_virt(state);
> + kho_unpreserve_pages(phys_to_page(ser->page_phys),
> + ser->size >> PAGE_SHIFT);
> + kho_unpreserve_free(ser);
> +}
> +
> +void *dma_direct_restore_allocation(struct device *dev, size_t size,
> + dma_addr_t *dma_handle, gfp_t gfp,
> + unsigned long attrs, u64 state)
Are we relying on the caller to pass same attrs? So, a buffer with
non-coherent attrs can be mapped with coherent attrs in the new kernel.
Could this cause side-effects? Should we check for such driver bugs with
a WARN here while comparing older attrs with the newer ones too?
Coherency breaking due to subtle driver bugs is very painful to debug :/
> +{
> + bool remap = false, set_uncached = false;
> + struct dma_alloc_ser *ser = NULL;
> + struct page *page;
> + void *cpu_addr;
> +
> + if (!kho_is_enabled())
> + return NULL;
> +
> + ser = phys_to_virt(state);
> + page = phys_to_page(ser->page_phys);
[...]
> +
> + /*
> + * Remapping will be blocking so return error. The preserved memory
> + * might be already decrypted in the previous kernel, but the decryption
> + * call is not guaranteed to be non-blocking so return error always if
> + * decryption is required.
> + */
> + if ((remap || force_dma_unencrypted(dev)) &&
> + dma_direct_use_pool(dev, gfp))
> + return NULL;
> +
> + /*
> + * Encryption scheme changed between two kernels and this might cause
> + * issues if device/driver is not handling it properly.
> + */
> + WARN_ON_ONCE(ser->force_decrypted != force_dma_unencrypted(dev));
> +
> + /*
> + * arch_dma_prep_coherent() should make sure that any cache lines from
> + * the previous kernel, if the device was coherent previously or cached
> + * mapping in this kernel during init are not problamatic for
> + * non-coherent allocations.
> + */
> + if (remap) {
> + pgprot_t prot = dma_pgprot(dev, PAGE_KERNEL, attrs);
> +
> + if (force_dma_unencrypted(dev))
> + prot = pgprot_decrypted(prot);
> +
> + arch_dma_prep_coherent(page, size);
> +
> + cpu_addr = dma_common_contiguous_remap(page, size, prot,
> + __builtin_return_address(0));
> + if (!cpu_addr)
> + return NULL;
Should we be kho_restore_free-ing on all these error paths?
We only seem to be kho_restore_free-ing on the success path.
Same for kho_restore_pages.. if we return an error here, we don't
restore the preserved pages? Are we leaking those too?
> + } else {
> + cpu_addr = page_address(page);
> + if (dma_set_decrypted(dev, cpu_addr, size))
> + return NULL;
> + }
> +
> + if (set_uncached) {
> + arch_dma_prep_coherent(page, size);
> + cpu_addr = arch_dma_set_uncached(cpu_addr, size);
> + if (IS_ERR(cpu_addr))
> + return NULL;
> + }
> +
> + *dma_handle = phys_to_dma_direct(dev, ser->page_phys);
> +
> + /*
> + * Cannot free the restored pages on error here as these might be in use
> + * by a device with direct allocation in the previous kernel.
> + */
> + WARN_ON(!kho_restore_pages(ser->page_phys,
> + ser->size >> PAGE_SHIFT));
> + kho_restore_free(ser);
> + return cpu_addr;
> +}
> +#endif
> +
> void dma_direct_free(struct device *dev, size_t size,
> void *cpu_addr, dma_addr_t dma_addr, unsigned long attrs)
> {
Thanks,
Praan