Re: [PATCH v2 1/2] dmaengine: avalon: Intel Avalon-MM DMA Interface for PCIe

[Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@oracle.com>]

On Wed, Oct 09, 2019 at 04:58:12PM +0200, Alexander Gordeev wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 09, 2019 at 03:14:41PM +0300, Dan Carpenter wrote:
> > > +config AVALON_DMA_PCI_VENDOR_ID
> > > +	hex "PCI vendor ID"
> > > +	default "0x1172"
> > > +
> > > +config AVALON_DMA_PCI_DEVICE_ID
> > > +	hex "PCI device ID"
> > > +	default "0xe003"
> > 
> > This feels wrong.  Why isn't it known in advance.
> 
> Because device designers would likely use they own IDs. The ones I
> put are just defaults inherited from the (Altera) reference design.
> 
> > > +	u32 *rd_flags = hw->dma_desc_table_rd.cpu_addr->flags;
> > > +	u32 *wr_flags = hw->dma_desc_table_wr.cpu_addr->flags;
> > > +	struct avalon_dma_desc *desc;
> > > +	struct virt_dma_desc *vdesc;
> > > +	bool rd_done;
> > > +	bool wr_done;
> > > +
> > > +	spin_lock(lock);
> > > +
> > > +	rd_done = (hw->h2d_last_id < 0);
> > > +	wr_done = (hw->d2h_last_id < 0);
> > > +
> > > +	if (rd_done && wr_done) {
> > > +		spin_unlock(lock);
> > > +		return IRQ_NONE;
> > > +	}
> > > +
> > > +	do {
> > > +		if (!rd_done && rd_flags[hw->h2d_last_id])
> > > +			rd_done = true;
> > > +
> > > +		if (!wr_done && wr_flags[hw->d2h_last_id])
> > > +			wr_done = true;
> > > +	} while (!rd_done || !wr_done);
> > 
> > This loop is very strange.  It feels like the last_id indexes needs
> > to atomic or protected from racing somehow so we don't do an out of
> > bounds read.
> 
> My bad. I should have put a comment on this. This polling comes from my
> reading of the Intel documentation:
> 
> "The MSI interrupt notifies the host when a DMA operation has completed.
> After the host receives this interrupt, it can poll the DMA read or write
> status table to determine which entry or entries have the done bit set."
> 
> "The Descriptor Controller writes a 1 to the done bit of the status DWORD
> to indicate successful completion. The Descriptor Controller also sends
> an MSI interrupt for the final descriptor. After receiving this MSI,
> host software can poll the done bit to determine status."
> 
> I sense an ambiguity above. It sounds possible an MSI interrupt could be
> delivered before corresponding done bit is set. May be imperfect wording..
> Anyway, the loop does look weird and in reality I doubt I observed the
> done bit unset even once. So I put this polling just in case.

You're missing my point.  When we set
hw->d2h_last_id = 1;
...
hw->d2h_last_id = 2;

There is a tiny moment where ->d2h_last_id is transitioning from 1 to 2
where its value is unknown.  We're in a busy loop here so we have a
decent chance of hitting that 1/1000,000th of a second.  If we happen to
hit it at exactly the right time then we're reading from a random
address and it will cause an oops.

We have to use atomic_t types or something to handle race conditions.

regards,
dan carpenter