From: Lucas Stach <l.stach@pengutronix.de>
To: Robin Gong <yibin.gong@nxp.com>,
"vkoul@kernel.org" <vkoul@kernel.org>,
"dan.j.williams@intel.com" <dan.j.williams@intel.com>,
"s.hauer@pengutronix.de" <s.hauer@pengutronix.de>,
"linux@armlinux.org.uk" <linux@armlinux.org.uk>
Cc: "dmaengine@vger.kernel.org" <dmaengine@vger.kernel.org>,
"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
dl-linux-imx <linux-imx@nxp.com>,
"kernel@pengutronix.de" <kernel@pengutronix.de>,
"linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org"
<linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>
Subject: [v3,3/3] dmaengine: imx-sdma: allocate max 20 bds for one transfer
Date: Mon, 06 Aug 2018 14:29:50 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1533558590.2809.1.camel@pengutronix.de> (raw)
Hi Robin,
Am Montag, den 06.08.2018, 08:04 +0000 schrieb Robin Gong:
> Hello Lucas,
> Any comment for my reply?
So I've looked at this again and sadly I need to NACK this patch. It is
a total API abuse of the dma_pool API and even the patch introducing
the dma_pool usage in this driver is wrong and should be reverted.
The SDMA need contiguous buffer descriptors for each channel, something
the dma_pool abstraction isn't able to provide. So either the dma_pool
implementation needs to be extended to support this use-case, or you
can't use this at all in the sdma driver. Adding hacks, which are
abusing the API, to cram a dma_pool into the sdma driver is not a valid
way to implement things for upstream.
Regards,
Lucas
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Robin Gong
> > Sent: 2018年7月25日 9:25
> > To: 'Lucas Stach' <l.stach@pengutronix.de>; vkoul@kernel.org;
> > dan.j.williams@intel.com; s.hauer@pengutronix.de; linux@armlinux.or
> > g.uk
> > Cc: dmaengine@vger.kernel.org; dl-linux-imx <linux-imx@nxp.com>;
> > kernel@pengutronix.de; linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org;
> > linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
> > Subject: RE: [PATCH v3 3/3] dmaengine: imx-sdma: allocate max 20
> > bds for one
> > transfer
> >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: Lucas Stach [mailto:l.stach@pengutronix.de]
> > > Sent: 2018年7月24日 17:22
> > > To: Robin Gong <yibin.gong@nxp.com>; vkoul@kernel.org;
> > > dan.j.williams@intel.com; s.hauer@pengutronix.de;
> > > linux@armlinux.org.uk
> > > Cc: dmaengine@vger.kernel.org; dl-linux-imx <linux-imx@nxp.com>;
> > > kernel@pengutronix.de; linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org;
> > > linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
> > > Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 3/3] dmaengine: imx-sdma: allocate max 20
> > > bds
> > > for one transfer
> > >
> > > Am Montag, den 23.07.2018, 13:55 +0000 schrieb Robin Gong:
> > > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > > From: Lucas Stach [mailto:l.stach@pengutronix.de]
> > > > > Sent: 2018年7月23日 18:54
> > > > > To: Robin Gong <yibin.gong@nxp.com>; vkoul@kernel.org;
> > > > > dan.j.williams@intel.com; s.hauer@pengutronix.de;
> > > > > linux@armlinux.or g.uk
> > > > > Cc: dmaengine@vger.kernel.org; dl-linux-imx <linux-imx@nxp.co
> > > > > m>;
> > > > > kernel@pengutronix.de; linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org;
> > > > > linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
> > > > > Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 3/3] dmaengine: imx-sdma: allocate max
> > > > > 20
> > > > > bds for one transfer
> > > > >
> > > > > Am Dienstag, den 24.07.2018, 01:46 +0800 schrieb Robin Gong:
> > > > > > If multi-bds used in one transfer, all bds should be
> > > > > > consisten
> > > > > > memory.To easily follow it, enlarge the dma pool size into
> > > > > > 20
> > > > > > bds, and it will report error if the number of bds is over
> > > > > > than
> > > > > > 20. For dmatest, the max count for single transfer is
> > > > > > NUM_BD *
> > > > >
> > > > > SDMA_BD_MAX_CNT
> > > > > > = 20 * 65535 = ~1.28MB.
> > > > >
> > > > > Both the commit message and the comment need a lot more care
> > > > > to
> > > > > actually tell what this commit is trying to achieve.
> > > > > Currently I
> > > > > don't follow at all. What does "consisten" mean? Do you mean
> > > > > BDs
> > > > > should be contiguous in memory?
> > > >
> > > > Yes, BDs should be contiguous one by one in memory.
> > >
> > > Okay, but this isn't what the code change does. By increasing the
> > > size
> > > parameter of the dma pool you just allocate 20 times as much
> > > memory as
> > > needed for each BD. So actually the BDs end up being very non-
> > > contiguous in memory as there are now holes of 19 BD sizes
> > > between the
> >
> > start of each BD.
> > Please notice only allocate bds memory from dma pool one time even
> > in multi
> > bds.
> > That's different with the common use case that allocate memory from
> > dma
> > pool everytime for every bd. Why do this is to make sure all bd
> > memory is
> > contiguous for single transfer whatever single bd or multi-bds,
> > since two call
> > dma_pool_alloc() can't promise the address is contiguous especially
> > for multi
> > thread case such as dmatest 'threads_per_chan = 5'. You can change
> > to '
> > norandom=true ' and ' test_buf_size = 163840' in dmatest.c to look
> > what issue
> > coming without this patch.
> > >
> > > So something isn't right with this change.
> >
> > I think this patch is the easy way to resolve the bd contiguous
> > issue, but the
> > cost is to allocate more dma pool memory which may not used.
> > >
> > > Regards,
> > > Lucas
> > >
> > > > >
> > > > > What do you gain by over-allocating each BD by a factor of
> > > > > 20?
> > > >
> > > > I guess dma_pool_alloc will return error in such case, and then
> > > > cause dma setup transfer failure.
> > > > >
> > > > > Regards,
> > > > > Lucas
> > > > >
> > > > > > Signed-off-by: Robin Gong <yibin.gong@nxp.com>
> > > > > > ---
> > > > > > drivers/dma/imx-sdma.c | 17 ++++++++++++++++-
> > > > > > 1 file changed, 16 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> > > > > >
> > > > > > diff --git a/drivers/dma/imx-sdma.c b/drivers/dma/imx-
> > > > > > sdma.c
> > > > > > index
> > > > > > b4ec2d2..5973489 100644
> > > > > > --- a/drivers/dma/imx-sdma.c
> > > > > > +++ b/drivers/dma/imx-sdma.c
> > > > > > @@ -298,6 +298,15 @@ struct sdma_context_data {
> > > > > > > u32 scratch7;
> > > > > >
> > > > > > } __attribute__ ((packed));
> > > > > >
> > > > > > +/*
> > > > > > + * All bds in one transfer should be consitent on SDMA. To
> > > > > > easily
> > > > > > +follow it,just
> > > > > > + * set the dma pool size as the enough bds. For example,
> > > > > > in
> > > > > > dmatest
> > > > > > +case, the
> > > > > > + * max 20 bds means the max for single transfer is NUM_BD
> > > > > > *
> > > > > > +SDMA_BD_MAX_CNT = 20
> > > > > > + * * 65535 = ~1.28MB. 20 bds supposed to be enough
> > > > > > basically.If
> > > > > > it's
> > > > > > +still not
> > > > > > + * enough in some specific cases, enlarge it here.Warning
> > > > > > message
> > > > > > +would also
> > > > > > + * appear if the bd numbers is over than 20.
> > > > > > + */
> > > > > > +#define NUM_BD 20
> > > > > >
> > > > > > struct sdma_engine;
> > > > > >
> > > > > > @@ -1273,7 +1282,7 @@ static int
> > > > > > sdma_alloc_chan_resources(struct dma_chan *chan)
> > > > > > > goto disable_clk_ahb;
> > > > > > > sdmac->bd_pool = dma_pool_create("bd_pool",
> > > > > > > chan-
> > > > > > > > device->dev,
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > - sizeof(struct
> > > > > > > sdma_buffer_descriptor),
> > > > > > > + NUM_BD * sizeof(struct
> > > > > > > sdma_buffer_descriptor),
> > > > > > > 32, 0);
> > > > > > > return 0;
> > > > > >
> > > > > > @@ -1314,6 +1323,12 @@ static struct sdma_desc
> > > > > > *sdma_transfer_init(struct sdma_channel *sdmac,
> > > > > > {
> > > > > > > struct sdma_desc *desc;
> > > > > > > + if (bds > NUM_BD) {
> > > > > > > + dev_err(sdmac->sdma->dev, "%d bds exceed
> > > > > > > the
> > > > > > > max %d\n",
> > > > > > > + bds, NUM_BD);
> > > > > > > + goto err_out;
> > > > > > > + }
> > > > > >
> > > > > > +
> > > > > > > desc = kzalloc((sizeof(*desc)), GFP_NOWAIT);
> > > > > > > if (!desc)
> > > > > > > goto err_out;
---
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe dmaengine" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: l.stach@pengutronix.de (Lucas Stach)
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: [PATCH v3 3/3] dmaengine: imx-sdma: allocate max 20 bds for one transfer
Date: Mon, 06 Aug 2018 14:29:50 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1533558590.2809.1.camel@pengutronix.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <DB6PR04MB3223BB3159EB8D376BE64B3E89200@DB6PR04MB3223.eurprd04.prod.outlook.com>
Hi Robin,
Am Montag, den 06.08.2018, 08:04 +0000 schrieb Robin Gong:
> Hello Lucas,
> Any comment for my reply?
So I've looked at this again and sadly I need to NACK this patch. It is
a total API abuse of the dma_pool API and even the patch introducing
the dma_pool usage in this driver is wrong and should be reverted.
The SDMA need contiguous buffer descriptors for each channel, something
the dma_pool abstraction isn't able to provide. So either the dma_pool
implementation needs to be extended to support this use-case, or you
can't use this at all in the sdma driver. Adding hacks, which are
abusing the API, to cram a dma_pool into the sdma driver is not a valid
way to implement things for upstream.
Regards,
Lucas
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Robin Gong
> > Sent: 2018?7?25? 9:25
> > To: 'Lucas Stach' <l.stach@pengutronix.de>; vkoul at kernel.org;
> > dan.j.williams at intel.com; s.hauer at pengutronix.de; linux at armlinux.or
> > g.uk
> > Cc: dmaengine at vger.kernel.org; dl-linux-imx <linux-imx@nxp.com>;
> > kernel at pengutronix.de; linux-arm-kernel at lists.infradead.org;
> > linux-kernel at vger.kernel.org
> > Subject: RE: [PATCH v3 3/3] dmaengine: imx-sdma: allocate max 20
> > bds for one
> > transfer
> >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: Lucas Stach [mailto:l.stach at pengutronix.de]
> > > Sent: 2018?7?24? 17:22
> > > To: Robin Gong <yibin.gong@nxp.com>; vkoul at kernel.org;
> > > dan.j.williams at intel.com; s.hauer at pengutronix.de;
> > > linux at armlinux.org.uk
> > > Cc: dmaengine at vger.kernel.org; dl-linux-imx <linux-imx@nxp.com>;
> > > kernel at pengutronix.de; linux-arm-kernel at lists.infradead.org;
> > > linux-kernel at vger.kernel.org
> > > Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 3/3] dmaengine: imx-sdma: allocate max 20
> > > bds
> > > for one transfer
> > >
> > > Am Montag, den 23.07.2018, 13:55 +0000 schrieb Robin Gong:
> > > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > > From: Lucas Stach [mailto:l.stach at pengutronix.de]
> > > > > Sent: 2018?7?23? 18:54
> > > > > To: Robin Gong <yibin.gong@nxp.com>; vkoul at kernel.org;
> > > > > dan.j.williams at intel.com; s.hauer at pengutronix.de;
> > > > > linux at armlinux.or g.uk
> > > > > Cc: dmaengine at vger.kernel.org; dl-linux-imx <linux-imx@nxp.co
> > > > > m>;
> > > > > kernel at pengutronix.de; linux-arm-kernel at lists.infradead.org;
> > > > > linux-kernel at vger.kernel.org
> > > > > Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 3/3] dmaengine: imx-sdma: allocate max
> > > > > 20
> > > > > bds for one transfer
> > > > >
> > > > > Am Dienstag, den 24.07.2018, 01:46 +0800 schrieb Robin Gong:
> > > > > > If multi-bds used in one transfer, all bds should be
> > > > > > consisten
> > > > > > memory.To easily follow it, enlarge the dma pool size into
> > > > > > 20
> > > > > > bds, and it will report error if the number of bds is over
> > > > > > than
> > > > > > 20. For dmatest, the max count for single transfer is
> > > > > > NUM_BD *
> > > > >
> > > > > SDMA_BD_MAX_CNT
> > > > > > = 20 * 65535 = ~1.28MB.
> > > > >
> > > > > Both the commit message and the comment need a lot more care
> > > > > to
> > > > > actually tell what this commit is trying to achieve.
> > > > > Currently I
> > > > > don't follow at all. What does "consisten" mean? Do you mean
> > > > > BDs
> > > > > should be contiguous in memory?
> > > >
> > > > Yes, BDs should be contiguous??one by one in memory.
> > >
> > > Okay, but this isn't what the code change does. By increasing the
> > > size
> > > parameter of the dma pool you just allocate 20 times as much
> > > memory as
> > > needed for each BD. So actually the BDs end up being very non-
> > > contiguous in memory as there are now holes of 19 BD sizes
> > > between the
> >
> > start of each BD.
> > Please notice only allocate bds memory from dma pool one time even
> > in multi
> > bds.
> > That's different with the common use case that allocate memory from
> > dma
> > pool everytime for every bd. Why do this is to make sure all bd
> > memory is
> > contiguous for single transfer whatever single bd or multi-bds,
> > since two call
> > dma_pool_alloc() can't promise the address is contiguous especially
> > for multi
> > thread case such as dmatest 'threads_per_chan = 5'. You can change
> > to '
> > norandom=true ' and ' test_buf_size = 163840' in dmatest.c to look
> > what issue
> > coming without this patch.
> > >
> > > So something isn't right with this change.
> >
> > I think this patch is the easy way to resolve the bd contiguous
> > issue, but the
> > cost is to allocate more dma pool memory which may not used.
> > >
> > > Regards,
> > > Lucas
> > >
> > > > >
> > > > > What do you gain by over-allocating each BD by a factor of
> > > > > 20?
> > > >
> > > > I guess dma_pool_alloc will return error in such case, and then
> > > > cause dma setup transfer failure.
> > > > >
> > > > > Regards,
> > > > > Lucas
> > > > >
> > > > > > Signed-off-by: Robin Gong <yibin.gong@nxp.com>
> > > > > > ---
> > > > > > ?drivers/dma/imx-sdma.c | 17 ++++++++++++++++-
> > > > > > ?1 file changed, 16 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> > > > > >
> > > > > > diff --git a/drivers/dma/imx-sdma.c b/drivers/dma/imx-
> > > > > > sdma.c
> > > > > > index
> > > > > > b4ec2d2..5973489 100644
> > > > > > --- a/drivers/dma/imx-sdma.c
> > > > > > +++ b/drivers/dma/imx-sdma.c
> > > > > > @@ -298,6 +298,15 @@ struct sdma_context_data {
> > > > > > > ? u32??scratch7;
> > > > > >
> > > > > > ?} __attribute__ ((packed));
> > > > > >
> > > > > > +/*
> > > > > > + * All bds in one transfer should be consitent on SDMA. To
> > > > > > easily
> > > > > > +follow it,just
> > > > > > + * set the dma pool size as the enough bds. For example,
> > > > > > in
> > > > > > dmatest
> > > > > > +case, the
> > > > > > + * max 20 bds means the max for single transfer is NUM_BD
> > > > > > *
> > > > > > +SDMA_BD_MAX_CNT = 20
> > > > > > + * * 65535 = ~1.28MB. 20 bds supposed to be enough
> > > > > > basically.If
> > > > > > it's
> > > > > > +still not
> > > > > > + * enough in some specific cases, enlarge it here.Warning
> > > > > > message
> > > > > > +would also
> > > > > > + * appear if the bd numbers is over than 20.
> > > > > > + */
> > > > > > +#define NUM_BD 20
> > > > > >
> > > > > > ?struct sdma_engine;
> > > > > >
> > > > > > @@ -1273,7 +1282,7 @@ static int
> > > > > > sdma_alloc_chan_resources(struct dma_chan *chan)
> > > > > > > ? goto disable_clk_ahb;
> > > > > > > ? sdmac->bd_pool = dma_pool_create("bd_pool",
> > > > > > > chan-
> > > > > > > > device->dev,
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > - sizeof(struct
> > > > > > > sdma_buffer_descriptor),
> > > > > > > + NUM_BD * sizeof(struct
> > > > > > > sdma_buffer_descriptor),
> > > > > > > ? 32, 0);
> > > > > > > ? return 0;
> > > > > >
> > > > > > @@ -1314,6 +1323,12 @@ static struct sdma_desc
> > > > > > *sdma_transfer_init(struct sdma_channel *sdmac,
> > > > > > ?{
> > > > > > > ? struct sdma_desc *desc;
> > > > > > > + if (bds > NUM_BD) {
> > > > > > > + dev_err(sdmac->sdma->dev, "%d bds exceed
> > > > > > > the
> > > > > > > max %d\n",
> > > > > > > + bds, NUM_BD);
> > > > > > > + goto err_out;
> > > > > > > + }
> > > > > >
> > > > > > +
> > > > > > > ? desc = kzalloc((sizeof(*desc)), GFP_NOWAIT);
> > > > > > > ? if (!desc)
> > > > > > > ? goto err_out;
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Lucas Stach <l.stach@pengutronix.de>
To: Robin Gong <yibin.gong@nxp.com>,
"vkoul@kernel.org" <vkoul@kernel.org>,
"dan.j.williams@intel.com" <dan.j.williams@intel.com>,
"s.hauer@pengutronix.de" <s.hauer@pengutronix.de>,
"linux@armlinux.org.uk" <linux@armlinux.org.uk>
Cc: "dmaengine@vger.kernel.org" <dmaengine@vger.kernel.org>,
"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
dl-linux-imx <linux-imx@nxp.com>,
"kernel@pengutronix.de" <kernel@pengutronix.de>,
"linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org"
<linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 3/3] dmaengine: imx-sdma: allocate max 20 bds for one transfer
Date: Mon, 06 Aug 2018 14:29:50 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1533558590.2809.1.camel@pengutronix.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <DB6PR04MB3223BB3159EB8D376BE64B3E89200@DB6PR04MB3223.eurprd04.prod.outlook.com>
Hi Robin,
Am Montag, den 06.08.2018, 08:04 +0000 schrieb Robin Gong:
> Hello Lucas,
> Any comment for my reply?
So I've looked at this again and sadly I need to NACK this patch. It is
a total API abuse of the dma_pool API and even the patch introducing
the dma_pool usage in this driver is wrong and should be reverted.
The SDMA need contiguous buffer descriptors for each channel, something
the dma_pool abstraction isn't able to provide. So either the dma_pool
implementation needs to be extended to support this use-case, or you
can't use this at all in the sdma driver. Adding hacks, which are
abusing the API, to cram a dma_pool into the sdma driver is not a valid
way to implement things for upstream.
Regards,
Lucas
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Robin Gong
> > Sent: 2018年7月25日 9:25
> > To: 'Lucas Stach' <l.stach@pengutronix.de>; vkoul@kernel.org;
> > dan.j.williams@intel.com; s.hauer@pengutronix.de; linux@armlinux.or
> > g.uk
> > Cc: dmaengine@vger.kernel.org; dl-linux-imx <linux-imx@nxp.com>;
> > kernel@pengutronix.de; linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org;
> > linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
> > Subject: RE: [PATCH v3 3/3] dmaengine: imx-sdma: allocate max 20
> > bds for one
> > transfer
> >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: Lucas Stach [mailto:l.stach@pengutronix.de]
> > > Sent: 2018年7月24日 17:22
> > > To: Robin Gong <yibin.gong@nxp.com>; vkoul@kernel.org;
> > > dan.j.williams@intel.com; s.hauer@pengutronix.de;
> > > linux@armlinux.org.uk
> > > Cc: dmaengine@vger.kernel.org; dl-linux-imx <linux-imx@nxp.com>;
> > > kernel@pengutronix.de; linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org;
> > > linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
> > > Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 3/3] dmaengine: imx-sdma: allocate max 20
> > > bds
> > > for one transfer
> > >
> > > Am Montag, den 23.07.2018, 13:55 +0000 schrieb Robin Gong:
> > > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > > From: Lucas Stach [mailto:l.stach@pengutronix.de]
> > > > > Sent: 2018年7月23日 18:54
> > > > > To: Robin Gong <yibin.gong@nxp.com>; vkoul@kernel.org;
> > > > > dan.j.williams@intel.com; s.hauer@pengutronix.de;
> > > > > linux@armlinux.or g.uk
> > > > > Cc: dmaengine@vger.kernel.org; dl-linux-imx <linux-imx@nxp.co
> > > > > m>;
> > > > > kernel@pengutronix.de; linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org;
> > > > > linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
> > > > > Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 3/3] dmaengine: imx-sdma: allocate max
> > > > > 20
> > > > > bds for one transfer
> > > > >
> > > > > Am Dienstag, den 24.07.2018, 01:46 +0800 schrieb Robin Gong:
> > > > > > If multi-bds used in one transfer, all bds should be
> > > > > > consisten
> > > > > > memory.To easily follow it, enlarge the dma pool size into
> > > > > > 20
> > > > > > bds, and it will report error if the number of bds is over
> > > > > > than
> > > > > > 20. For dmatest, the max count for single transfer is
> > > > > > NUM_BD *
> > > > >
> > > > > SDMA_BD_MAX_CNT
> > > > > > = 20 * 65535 = ~1.28MB.
> > > > >
> > > > > Both the commit message and the comment need a lot more care
> > > > > to
> > > > > actually tell what this commit is trying to achieve.
> > > > > Currently I
> > > > > don't follow at all. What does "consisten" mean? Do you mean
> > > > > BDs
> > > > > should be contiguous in memory?
> > > >
> > > > Yes, BDs should be contiguous one by one in memory.
> > >
> > > Okay, but this isn't what the code change does. By increasing the
> > > size
> > > parameter of the dma pool you just allocate 20 times as much
> > > memory as
> > > needed for each BD. So actually the BDs end up being very non-
> > > contiguous in memory as there are now holes of 19 BD sizes
> > > between the
> >
> > start of each BD.
> > Please notice only allocate bds memory from dma pool one time even
> > in multi
> > bds.
> > That's different with the common use case that allocate memory from
> > dma
> > pool everytime for every bd. Why do this is to make sure all bd
> > memory is
> > contiguous for single transfer whatever single bd or multi-bds,
> > since two call
> > dma_pool_alloc() can't promise the address is contiguous especially
> > for multi
> > thread case such as dmatest 'threads_per_chan = 5'. You can change
> > to '
> > norandom=true ' and ' test_buf_size = 163840' in dmatest.c to look
> > what issue
> > coming without this patch.
> > >
> > > So something isn't right with this change.
> >
> > I think this patch is the easy way to resolve the bd contiguous
> > issue, but the
> > cost is to allocate more dma pool memory which may not used.
> > >
> > > Regards,
> > > Lucas
> > >
> > > > >
> > > > > What do you gain by over-allocating each BD by a factor of
> > > > > 20?
> > > >
> > > > I guess dma_pool_alloc will return error in such case, and then
> > > > cause dma setup transfer failure.
> > > > >
> > > > > Regards,
> > > > > Lucas
> > > > >
> > > > > > Signed-off-by: Robin Gong <yibin.gong@nxp.com>
> > > > > > ---
> > > > > > drivers/dma/imx-sdma.c | 17 ++++++++++++++++-
> > > > > > 1 file changed, 16 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> > > > > >
> > > > > > diff --git a/drivers/dma/imx-sdma.c b/drivers/dma/imx-
> > > > > > sdma.c
> > > > > > index
> > > > > > b4ec2d2..5973489 100644
> > > > > > --- a/drivers/dma/imx-sdma.c
> > > > > > +++ b/drivers/dma/imx-sdma.c
> > > > > > @@ -298,6 +298,15 @@ struct sdma_context_data {
> > > > > > > u32 scratch7;
> > > > > >
> > > > > > } __attribute__ ((packed));
> > > > > >
> > > > > > +/*
> > > > > > + * All bds in one transfer should be consitent on SDMA. To
> > > > > > easily
> > > > > > +follow it,just
> > > > > > + * set the dma pool size as the enough bds. For example,
> > > > > > in
> > > > > > dmatest
> > > > > > +case, the
> > > > > > + * max 20 bds means the max for single transfer is NUM_BD
> > > > > > *
> > > > > > +SDMA_BD_MAX_CNT = 20
> > > > > > + * * 65535 = ~1.28MB. 20 bds supposed to be enough
> > > > > > basically.If
> > > > > > it's
> > > > > > +still not
> > > > > > + * enough in some specific cases, enlarge it here.Warning
> > > > > > message
> > > > > > +would also
> > > > > > + * appear if the bd numbers is over than 20.
> > > > > > + */
> > > > > > +#define NUM_BD 20
> > > > > >
> > > > > > struct sdma_engine;
> > > > > >
> > > > > > @@ -1273,7 +1282,7 @@ static int
> > > > > > sdma_alloc_chan_resources(struct dma_chan *chan)
> > > > > > > goto disable_clk_ahb;
> > > > > > > sdmac->bd_pool = dma_pool_create("bd_pool",
> > > > > > > chan-
> > > > > > > > device->dev,
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > - sizeof(struct
> > > > > > > sdma_buffer_descriptor),
> > > > > > > + NUM_BD * sizeof(struct
> > > > > > > sdma_buffer_descriptor),
> > > > > > > 32, 0);
> > > > > > > return 0;
> > > > > >
> > > > > > @@ -1314,6 +1323,12 @@ static struct sdma_desc
> > > > > > *sdma_transfer_init(struct sdma_channel *sdmac,
> > > > > > {
> > > > > > > struct sdma_desc *desc;
> > > > > > > + if (bds > NUM_BD) {
> > > > > > > + dev_err(sdmac->sdma->dev, "%d bds exceed
> > > > > > > the
> > > > > > > max %d\n",
> > > > > > > + bds, NUM_BD);
> > > > > > > + goto err_out;
> > > > > > > + }
> > > > > >
> > > > > > +
> > > > > > > desc = kzalloc((sizeof(*desc)), GFP_NOWAIT);
> > > > > > > if (!desc)
> > > > > > > goto err_out;
next reply other threads:[~2018-08-06 12:29 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 35+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2018-08-06 12:29 Lucas Stach [this message]
2018-08-06 12:29 ` [PATCH v3 3/3] dmaengine: imx-sdma: allocate max 20 bds for one transfer Lucas Stach
2018-08-06 12:29 ` Lucas Stach
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2018-08-06 8:04 [v3,3/3] " Robin Gong
2018-08-06 8:04 ` [PATCH v3 3/3] " Robin Gong
2018-08-06 8:04 ` Robin Gong
2018-07-30 5:04 [v3,2/3] dmaengine: imx-sdma: add memcpy interface Vinod Koul
2018-07-30 5:04 ` [PATCH v3 2/3] " Vinod
2018-07-30 5:04 ` Vinod
2018-07-30 5:04 [v3,1/3] dmaengine: imx-sdma: add SDMA_BD_MAX_CNT to replace '0xffff' Vinod Koul
2018-07-30 5:04 ` [PATCH v3 1/3] " Vinod
2018-07-30 5:04 ` Vinod
2018-07-25 1:24 [v3,3/3] dmaengine: imx-sdma: allocate max 20 bds for one transfer Robin Gong
2018-07-25 1:24 ` [PATCH v3 3/3] " Robin Gong
2018-07-25 1:24 ` Robin Gong
2018-07-24 9:22 [v3,3/3] " Lucas Stach
2018-07-24 9:22 ` [PATCH v3 3/3] " Lucas Stach
2018-07-24 9:22 ` Lucas Stach
2018-07-23 17:46 [v3,3/3] " Robin Gong
2018-07-23 17:46 ` [PATCH v3 3/3] " Robin Gong
2018-07-23 17:46 ` Robin Gong
2018-07-23 17:46 [v3,2/3] dmaengine: imx-sdma: add memcpy interface Robin Gong
2018-07-23 17:46 ` [PATCH v3 2/3] " Robin Gong
2018-07-23 17:46 ` Robin Gong
2018-07-23 17:46 [v3,1/3] dmaengine: imx-sdma: add SDMA_BD_MAX_CNT to replace '0xffff' Robin Gong
2018-07-23 17:46 ` [PATCH v3 1/3] " Robin Gong
2018-07-23 17:46 ` Robin Gong
2018-07-23 17:46 [PATCH v3 0/3] add memcpy support for sdma Robin Gong
2018-07-23 17:46 ` Robin Gong
2018-07-23 13:55 [v3,3/3] dmaengine: imx-sdma: allocate max 20 bds for one transfer Robin Gong
2018-07-23 13:55 ` [PATCH v3 3/3] " Robin Gong
2018-07-23 13:55 ` Robin Gong
2018-07-23 10:54 [v3,3/3] " Lucas Stach
2018-07-23 10:54 ` [PATCH v3 3/3] " Lucas Stach
2018-07-23 10:54 ` Lucas Stach
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=1533558590.2809.1.camel@pengutronix.de \
--to=l.stach@pengutronix.de \
--cc=dan.j.williams@intel.com \
--cc=dmaengine@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=kernel@pengutronix.de \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-imx@nxp.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux@armlinux.org.uk \
--cc=s.hauer@pengutronix.de \
--cc=vkoul@kernel.org \
--cc=yibin.gong@nxp.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.