lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2014]   [Feb]   [28]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: mlx4_core: DMA-API: device driver tries to sync DMA memory it has not allocated
On Thu, 27 Feb 2014 19:01:09 +0200
Amir Vadai <amirv@mellanox.com> wrote:

> On 10/12/13 14:44 +0100, Gerald Schaefer wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > During network stress test with CONFIG_DMA_API_DEBUG=y we get the following
> > message on the server side:
> >
> > [57523.955982] mlx4_core 0000:00:00.0: DMA-API: device driver tries to sync DMA memory it has not allocated [device address=0x0000000143d2c202] [size=1526 bytes]
> > [57523.956018] ------------[ cut here ]------------
> > [57523.956021] WARNING: at /home/dailybuild/builder/packages/BUILD/linux-3.12.3-20131209/lib/dma-debug.c:986
> > [57523.956022] Modules linked in: mlx4_en dm_multipath scsi_dh mlx4_core eadm_sch dm_mod lcs autofs4
> > [57523.956034] CPU: 3 PID: 20 Comm: ksoftirqd/3 Not tainted 3.12.3-65.x.20131209-s390xdefault #1
> > [57523.956037] task: 000000026f47cb60 ti: 000000026f484000 task.ti: 000000026f484000
> > [57523.956044] Krnl PSW : 0404e00180000000 00000000004a0422 (check_sync+0xf2/0x52c)
> > [57523.956047] R:0 T:1 IO:0 EX:0 Key:0 M:1 W:0 P:0 AS:3 CC:2 PM:0 EA:3
> > [57523.956047] Krnl GPRS: 0000000000000111 000000008b767e9c 0000000000000092 0000000000000000
> > [57523.956051] 00000000004a041e 0000000000000000 00000000000005f6 0000000143d2c202
> > [57523.956053] 000000026f487a98 0000000000000001 0000000000a71144 000000026f10dd60
> > [57523.956055] 0000000000000000 000000000075bb18 00000000004a041e 000000026f487980
> > [57523.956064] Krnl Code: 00000000004a0412: c020002143d7 larl %r2,8c8bc0
> > [57523.956064] 00000000004a0418: c0e50012717a brasl %r14,6ee70c
> > [57523.956064] #00000000004a041e: a7f40001 brc 15,4a0420
> > [57523.956064] >00000000004a0422: e330a0000012 lt %r3,0(%r10)
> > [57523.956064] 00000000004a0428: a7740201 brc 7,4a082a
> > [57523.956064] 00000000004a042c: a7f401f3 brc 15,4a0812
> > [57523.956064] 00000000004a0430: d5078030c030 clc 48(8,%r8),48(%r12)
> > [57523.956064] 00000000004a0436: a7c40070 brc 12,4a0516
> > [57523.956081] Call Trace:
> > [57523.956084] ([<00000000004a041e>] check_sync+0xee/0x52c)
> > [57523.956087] [<00000000004a0a26>] debug_dma_sync_single_for_cpu+0x66/0x74
> > [57523.956094] [<000003ff801fcae0>] mlx4_en_complete_rx_desc+0x15c/0x240 [mlx4_en]
> > [57523.956098] [<000003ff801fe1fa>] mlx4_en_process_rx_cq+0x56a/0xb58 [mlx4_en]
> > [57523.956101] [<000003ff801fe8ea>] mlx4_en_poll_rx_cq+0x92/0xf8 [mlx4_en]
> > [57523.956105] [<00000000005d558c>] net_rx_action+0xa0/0x2f0
> > [57523.956109] [<000000000013cd10>] __do_softirq+0x1e8/0x480
> > [57523.956111] [<000000000013cfe4>] run_ksoftirqd+0x3c/0x80
> > [57523.956114] [<000000000016f496>] smpboot_thread_fn+0x2c6/0x2e8
> > [57523.956118] [<0000000000163834>] kthread+0xd0/0xe4
> > [57523.956123] [<00000000006ff19e>] kernel_thread_starter+0x6/0xc
> > [57523.956125] [<00000000006ff198>] kernel_thread_starter+0x0/0xc
> > [57523.956127] 1 lock held by ksoftirqd/3/20:
> > [57523.956129] #0: (&(&dma_entry_hash[i].lock)->rlock){-.-...}, at: [<000000000049f1d6>] get_hash_bucket+0x4a/0x64
> > [57523.956135] Last Breaking-Event-Address:
> > [57523.956137] [<00000000004a041e>] check_sync+0xee/0x52c
> > [57523.956139] ---[ end trace ec82af84e1d16c5f ]---
> >
> > --
>
> Hi Gerald,
>
> It seems that I missed this mail.
>
> I didn't see this warning in our lab in x86 platform.
> Is it reproduced easily on PPC?
> Any hints how to reproduce it in our lab?

Hi Amir,

I could narrow it down to a uperf testrun with the following profile
and CONFIG_DMA_API_DEBUG=y (it usually takes multiple runs to show):

<profile name="test250">
<group nthreads="250">
<transaction iterations="1">
<flowop type="accept" options="remotehost=10.100.1.36 protocol=tcp"/>
</transaction>
<transaction duration="300">
<flowop type="write" options="size=1"/>
<flowop type="read" options="size=1"/>
</transaction>
<transaction iterations="1">
<flowop type="disconnect" />
</transaction>
</group>
</profile>

>
> Do you have a 'good' version that didn't have the warning?

No, it showed on 3.12 and 3.13, before that we had other warnings but
not this one as far as I remember.

Thanks,
Gerald



\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2014-02-28 23:01    [W:0.047 / U:0.212 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site