Why is that? I haven't looked at how one actually programs an IOMMU. Is it a fundamental limitation or some sort of "we can't break existing devices relying on being able to read/write anywhere"?
-
-
AIUI it's disabled by default until the OS enables it, bypassable in various ways, and not supported by lots of drivers so OS ends up turning it partially or fully off...
2 replies 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @RichFelker @stevecheckoway and
Also even if a driver uses it, it can use it wrong by sharing memory containing pointers into another memory space (eg kernel memory) that device can then clobber.
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @RichFelker @stevecheckoway and
Right OS model is not to allow drivers to setup their own IOMMU mappings or DMA buffers, force everything through permanent DMA bounce buffers owned by kernel in fixed ranges.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
That is not a reasonable approach. It has too much performance cost. It wouldn't work in any sensible way for e.g. graphics or high performance networking.
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes -
Relevant to 1% of systems and the other 99% have to suffer insecure architecture for it.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
You do realize that cloud is a huge market and they care about network performance, and that gamers are a rather important market and they care about graphics performance, right? Sorry, no, your approach is not viable in the general case.
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Gamers don't run Linux. Hypervisors don't need to use the same architecture end user devices do.
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Ah, so your argument is that Linux should be secure on the desktop but Windows shouldn't? And that Linux should have crippled graphics performance because nobody cares? Sorry, no. I'm not a PC gamer but I enjoy my compositing, Blender, and other GPU-reliant tasks performing well
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes -
Roughly. I just want the gpu reliant tasks gone from the essential software stacks. For so many reasons.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
Giving people a choice between security and performance, people will choose performance. Doing it the lazy way is dumb and does not help improve the state of things. We need solutions that actually perform so they can be universally deployed.
-
-
They're inevitably complex and have unforseen security weaknesses as a result. Don't give choice. Only give the secure option.
2 replies 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @RichFelker @marcan42 and
That's giving people a choice, the choice to use other software. :')
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes - Show replies
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.