From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1755772Ab3AIAo1 (ORCPT ); Tue, 8 Jan 2013 19:44:27 -0500 Received: from userp1040.oracle.com ([156.151.31.81]:41504 "EHLO userp1040.oracle.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1755277Ab3AIAo0 (ORCPT ); Tue, 8 Jan 2013 19:44:26 -0500 Date: Tue, 8 Jan 2013 19:43:41 -0500 From: Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk To: Yinghai Lu Cc: "Eric W. Biederman" , Shuah Khan , Thomas Gleixner , Ingo Molnar , "H. Peter Anvin" , Andrew Morton , Borislav Petkov , Jan Kiszka , Jason Wessel , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Joerg Roedel Subject: Re: [PATCH v7u1 26/31] x86: Don't enable swiotlb if there is not enough ram for it Message-ID: <20130109004340.GA12234@konrad-lan.dumpdata.com> References: <20130107152622.GD3219@phenom.dumpdata.com> <8762382z2c.fsf@xmission.com> <87y5g4z7rp.fsf@xmission.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) X-Source-IP: acsinet22.oracle.com [141.146.126.238] Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Tue, Jan 08, 2013 at 03:40:11PM -0800, Yinghai Lu wrote: > On Mon, Jan 7, 2013 at 7:50 PM, Yinghai Lu wrote: > > On Mon, Jan 7, 2013 at 7:13 PM, Eric W. Biederman wrote: > >> I meant we should detect failure to allocate bounce buffers in in > >> swiotlb_init() instead of panicing. > >> > >> I meant swiotlb_map_single() should either panic or simply fail. > >> > >> If I have read lib/swiotlb.c correctly the only place we allocate a > >> bounce buffer is in swiotlb_map_single. If there are more places we can > >> allocate bounce buffers those need to be handled as well. > > > > ok, will give it a try. > > please check if you are ok with attached. > > looks like it need more change of lines. The swiotlb_full check I don't believe is neccessary. You won't ever get to that unless swiotlb_map_page has at least provided a bounce buffer. And if the swiotlb_map_page does not have a bounce buffer it will exit with: + if (no_iotlb_memory) + return SWIOTLB_MAP_ERROR; + which is dangerous. That is b/c there are drivers that don't use the dma_mapping_error check (so check the bus address after calling pci_map_*). This means they would try to do DMA on 0xffffffff (yikes!). That is reason the failback (v_overflow_buffer) is still in usage - b/c we have drivers that might just do this and this is the last resort for them. And until those drivers are fixed - we _need_ this fallback to work.