Messages in this thread | | | Date | Fri, 21 Nov 2014 11:06:10 +0000 | From | Catalin Marinas <> | Subject | Re: For the problem when using swiotlb |
| |
On Wed, Nov 19, 2014 at 03:56:42PM +0000, Arnd Bergmann wrote: > On Wednesday 19 November 2014 15:46:35 Catalin Marinas wrote: > > Going back to original topic, the dma_supported() function on arm64 > > calls swiotlb_dma_supported() which actually checks whether the swiotlb > > bounce buffer is within the dma mask. This transparent bouncing (unlike > > arm32 where it needs to be explicit) is not always optimal, though > > required for 32-bit only devices on a 64-bit system. The problem is when > > the driver is 64-bit capable but forgets to call > > dma_set_mask_and_coherent() (that's not the only question I got about > > running out of swiotlb buffers). > > I think it would be nice to warn once per device that starts using the > swiotlb. Really all 32-bit DMA masters should have a proper IOMMU > attached.
It would be nice to have a dev_warn_once().
I think it makes sense on arm64 to avoid swiotlb bounce buffers for coherent allocations altogether. The __dma_alloc_coherent() function already checks coherent_dma_mask and sets GFP_DMA accordingly. If we have a device that cannot even cope with a 32-bit ZONE_DMA, we should just not support DMA at all on it (without an IOMMU). The arm32 __dma_supported() has a similar check.
Swiotlb is still required for the streaming DMA since we get bouncing for pages allocated outside the driver control (e.g. VFS layer which doesn't care about GFP_DMA), hoping a 16M bounce buffer would be enough.
Ding seems to imply that CMA fixes the problem, which means that the issue is indeed coherent allocations.
-- Catalin
| |