Messages in this thread | | | From | Jesper Dangaard Brouer <> | Date | Wed, 17 Nov 2021 12:52:18 +0100 | Subject | Re: [PATCH net-next v6] page_pool: disable dma mapping support for 32-bit arch with 64-bit DMA |
| |
On 15/11/2021 19.55, Ilias Apalodimas wrote: > > [...] > >>>>>>>>> Some more details can be found here: >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> https://linux.kernelci.org/test/case/id/6189968c3ec0a3c06e3358fe/ >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Here's the same revision on the same platform booting fine with a >>>>>>>>> plain multi_v7_defconfig build: >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> https://linux.kernelci.org/test/plan/id/61899d322c0e9fee7e3358ec/ >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Please let us know if you need any help debugging this issue or >>>>>>>>> if you have a fix to try. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> The patch below is removing the dma mapping support in page pool >>>>>>>> for 32 bit systems with 64 bit dma address, so it seems there >>>>>>>> is indeed a a drvier using the the page pool with PP_FLAG_DMA_MAP >>>>>>>> flags set in a 32 bit systems with 64 bit dma address. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> It seems we might need to revert the below patch or implement the >>>>>>>> DMA-mapping tracking support in the driver as mentioned in the below >>>>>>>> commit log. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> which ethernet driver do you use in your system? >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Thanks for taking a look and sorry for the slow reply. Here's a >>>>>>> booting test job with LPAE disabled: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> https://linux.kernelci.org/test/plan/id/618dbb81c60c4d94503358f1/ >>>>>>> https://storage.kernelci.org/mainline/master/v5.15-12452-g5833291ab6de/arm/multi_v7_defconfig/gcc-10/lab-collabora/baseline-nfs-rk3288-rock2-square.html#L812 >>>>>>> >>>>>>> [ 8.314523] rk_gmac-dwmac ff290000.ethernet eth0: Link is Up - 1Gbps/Full - flow control rx/tx >>>>>>> >>>>>>> So the driver is drivers/net/ethernet/stmicro/stmmac/dwmac-rk.c >>>>>> >>>>>> Thanks for the report, this patch seems to cause problem for 32-bit >>>>>> system with LPAE enabled. >>>>>> >>>>>> As LPAE seems like a common feature for 32 bits system, this patch >>>>>> might need to be reverted. >>>>>> >>>>>> @Jesper, @Ilias, what do you think? >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> So enabling LPAE also enables CONFIG_ARCH_DMA_ADDR_T_64BIT on that board? >>>>> Doing a quick grep only selects that for XEN. I am ok reverting that, but >>>>> I think we need to understand how the dma address ended up being 64bit. >>>> >>>> So looking a bit closer, indeed enabling LPAE always enables this. So >>>> we need to revert the patch. >>>> Yunsheng will you send that? >>> >>> Sure. >> >> Why don't we change that driver[1] to not use page_pool_get_dma_addr() ? >> >> [1] drivers/net/ethernet/stmicro/stmmac/dwmac-rk.c >> >> I took a closer look and it seems the driver have struct stmmac_rx_buffer in >> which is stored the dma_addr it gets from page_pool_get_dma_addr(). >> >> See func: stmmac_init_rx_buffers >> >> static int stmmac_init_rx_buffers(struct stmmac_priv *priv, >> struct dma_desc *p, >> int i, gfp_t flags, u32 queue) >> { >> >> if (!buf->page) { >> buf->page = page_pool_dev_alloc_pages(rx_q->page_pool); >> if (!buf->page) >> return -ENOMEM; >> buf->page_offset = stmmac_rx_offset(priv); >> } >> [...] >> >> buf->addr = page_pool_get_dma_addr(buf->page) + buf->page_offset; >> >> stmmac_set_desc_addr(priv, p, buf->addr); >> [...] >> } >> >> I question if this driver really to use page_pool for storing the dma_addr >> as it just extract it and store it outside page_pool? >> >> @Ilias it looks like you added part of the page_pool support in this driver, >> so I hope you can give a qualified guess on: >> How much work will it be to let driver do the DMA-map itself? >> (and not depend on the DMA-map feature provided by page_pool) > > It shouldn't be that hard. However when we removed that we were hoping we > had no active consumers. So we'll have to fix this and check for other > 32-bit boards with LPAE and page_pool handling the DMA mappings. > But the point now is that this is far from a 'hardware configuration' of > 32-bit CPU + 64-bit DMA. Every armv7 and x86 board can get that. So I was > thinking it's better to revert this and live with the 'weird' handling in the > code.
Okay, I acked the revert. After discussing this over IRC with Ilias (my page_pool co-maintainer). Guess we will have to live with maintaining this code for 32-bit CPU + 64-bit DMA.
--Jesper
| |