lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2022]   [Sep]   [23]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
SubjectRe: [PATCH v2 1/4] RISC-V: Fix ioremap_cache() and ioremap_wc() for systems with Svpbmt
From
On Fri, 23 Sep 2022 03:35:50 PDT (-0700), Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 22, 2022, at 6:35 PM, Palmer Dabbelt wrote:
>> On Thu, 15 Sep 2022 19:24:55 PDT (-0700), apatel@ventanamicro.com wrote:
>>>
>>> On Tue, Aug 30, 2022 at 10:17 AM Anup Patel <apatel@ventanamicro.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Currently, all flavors of ioremap_xyz() function maps to the generic
>>>> ioremap() which means any ioremap_xyz() call will always map the
>>>> target memory as IO using _PAGE_IOREMAP page attributes. This breaks
>>>> ioremap_cache() and ioremap_wc() on systems with Svpbmt because memory
>>>> remapped using ioremap_cache() and ioremap_wc() will use _PAGE_IOREMAP
>>>> page attributes.
>>>>
>>>> To address above (just like other architectures), we implement RISC-V
>>>> specific ioremap_cache() and ioremap_wc() which maps memory using page
>>>> attributes as defined by the Svpbmt specification.
>>>>
>>>> Fixes: ff689fd21cb1 ("riscv: add RISC-V Svpbmt extension support")
>>>> Co-developed-by: Mayuresh Chitale <mchitale@ventanamicro.com>
>>>> Signed-off-by: Mayuresh Chitale <mchitale@ventanamicro.com>
>>>> Signed-off-by: Anup Patel <apatel@ventanamicro.com>
>>>
>>> This is a crucial RC fix. Can you please take this ?
>>
>> Sorry I missed this, I thought it was just part of the rest of this
>> patch set. That said, I'm not actually sure this is a critical fix:
>> sure it's a performance problem, and if some driver is expecting
>> ioremap_cache() to go fast then possibly a pretty big one, but the only
>> Svpmbt hardware that exists is the D1 and that was just supported this
>> release so it's not a regression. Maybe that's a bit pedantic, but all
>> this travel has kind of made things a mess and I'm trying to make sure
>> nothing goes off the rails.
>
> I think generally speaking any use of ioremap_cache() in a driver
> is a mistake. The few users that exist are usually from historic
> x86 specific code and are hard to kill off.

Should we just add some sort of CONFIG_ARCH_HAS_IOREMAP_CACHE and then
ban those drivers from everywhere else?

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2022-09-23 12:47    [W:0.064 / U:0.800 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site