lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2022]   [Jun]   [22]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH v2] drm/sun4i: Add DMA mask and segment size
Hi Robin,

On Tue, Jun 21, 2022 at 01:44:44PM +0100, Robin Murphy wrote:
> On 2022-06-20 19:13, Jernej Skrabec wrote:
> > Kernel occasionally complains that there is mismatch in segment size
> > when trying to render HW decoded videos and rendering them directly with
> > sun4i DRM driver. Following message can be observed on H6 SoC:
> >
> > [ 184.298308] ------------[ cut here ]------------
> > [ 184.298326] DMA-API: sun4i-drm display-engine: mapping sg segment longer than device claims to support [len=6144000] [max=65536]
> > [ 184.298364] WARNING: CPU: 1 PID: 382 at kernel/dma/debug.c:1162 debug_dma_map_sg+0x2b0/0x350
> > [ 184.322997] CPU: 1 PID: 382 Comm: ffmpeg Not tainted 5.19.0-rc1+ #1331
> > [ 184.329533] Hardware name: Tanix TX6 (DT)
> > [ 184.333544] pstate: 60000005 (nZCv daif -PAN -UAO -TCO -DIT -SSBS BTYPE=--)
> > [ 184.340512] pc : debug_dma_map_sg+0x2b0/0x350
> > [ 184.344882] lr : debug_dma_map_sg+0x2b0/0x350
> > [ 184.349250] sp : ffff800009f33a50
> > [ 184.352567] x29: ffff800009f33a50 x28: 0000000000010000 x27: ffff000001b86c00
> > [ 184.359725] x26: ffffffffffffffff x25: ffff000005d8cc80 x24: 0000000000000000
> > [ 184.366879] x23: ffff80000939ab18 x22: 0000000000000001 x21: 0000000000000001
> > [ 184.374031] x20: 0000000000000000 x19: ffff0000018a7410 x18: ffffffffffffffff
> > [ 184.381186] x17: 0000000000000000 x16: 0000000000000000 x15: ffffffffffffffff
> > [ 184.388338] x14: 0000000000000001 x13: ffff800009534e86 x12: 6f70707573206f74
> > [ 184.395493] x11: 20736d69616c6320 x10: 000000000000000a x9 : 0000000000010000
> > [ 184.402647] x8 : ffff8000093b6d40 x7 : ffff800009f33850 x6 : 000000000000000c
> > [ 184.409800] x5 : ffff0000bf997940 x4 : 0000000000000000 x3 : 0000000000000027
> > [ 184.416953] x2 : 0000000000000000 x1 : 0000000000000000 x0 : ffff000003960e80
> > [ 184.424106] Call trace:
> > [ 184.426556] debug_dma_map_sg+0x2b0/0x350
> > [ 184.430580] __dma_map_sg_attrs+0xa0/0x110
> > [ 184.434687] dma_map_sgtable+0x28/0x4c
> > [ 184.438447] vb2_dc_dmabuf_ops_map+0x60/0xcc
> > [ 184.442729] __map_dma_buf+0x2c/0xd4
> > [ 184.446321] dma_buf_map_attachment+0xa0/0x130
> > [ 184.450777] drm_gem_prime_import_dev+0x7c/0x18c
> > [ 184.455410] drm_gem_prime_fd_to_handle+0x1b8/0x214
> > [ 184.460300] drm_prime_fd_to_handle_ioctl+0x2c/0x40
> > [ 184.465190] drm_ioctl_kernel+0xc4/0x174
> > [ 184.469123] drm_ioctl+0x204/0x420
> > [ 184.472534] __arm64_sys_ioctl+0xac/0xf0
> > [ 184.476474] invoke_syscall+0x48/0x114
> > [ 184.480240] el0_svc_common.constprop.0+0x44/0xec
> > [ 184.484956] do_el0_svc+0x2c/0xc0
> > [ 184.488283] el0_svc+0x2c/0x84
> > [ 184.491354] el0t_64_sync_handler+0x11c/0x150
> > [ 184.495723] el0t_64_sync+0x18c/0x190
> > [ 184.499397] ---[ end trace 0000000000000000 ]---
> >
> > Fix that by setting DMA mask and segment size.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Jernej Skrabec <jernej.skrabec@gmail.com>
> > ---
> > Changes from v1:
> > - added comment
> > - updated commit message with kernel report
> >
> > drivers/gpu/drm/sun4i/sun4i_drv.c | 8 ++++++++
> > 1 file changed, 8 insertions(+)
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/sun4i/sun4i_drv.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/sun4i/sun4i_drv.c
> > index 275f7e4a03ae..f135a6b3cadb 100644
> > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/sun4i/sun4i_drv.c
> > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/sun4i/sun4i_drv.c
> > @@ -7,6 +7,7 @@
> > */
> > #include <linux/component.h>
> > +#include <linux/dma-mapping.h>
> > #include <linux/kfifo.h>
> > #include <linux/module.h>
> > #include <linux/of_graph.h>
> > @@ -367,6 +368,13 @@ static int sun4i_drv_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
> > INIT_KFIFO(list.fifo);
> > + /*
> > + * DE2 and DE3 cores actually supports 40-bit addresses, but
> > + * driver does not.
> > + */
> > + dma_set_mask_and_coherent(&pdev->dev, DMA_BIT_MASK(32));
> > + dma_set_max_seg_size(&pdev->dev, DMA_BIT_MASK(32));
>
> Nit: this one is a number, not a bitmask, so UINT_MAX would be more
> appropriate semantically.

Thanks for the suggestion, I've fixed it while applying

Maxime
[unhandled content-type:application/pgp-signature]
\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2022-06-22 09:40    [W:0.996 / U:0.556 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site