All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>
To: Conor.Dooley@microchip.com
Cc: hch@lst.de, sfr@canb.auug.org.au, linux-next@vger.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org,
	Mike Rapoport <rppt@kernel.org>
Subject: Re: linux-next: Tree for May 3
Date: Wed, 11 May 2022 14:37:24 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20220511123724.GA25121@lst.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <2c0e2fbe-4e45-4acc-c2a7-4f4dcf9161a3@microchip.com>

On Wed, May 11, 2022 at 10:10:40AM +0000, Conor.Dooley@microchip.com wrote:
> Without even trying the patch, I double checked the boot log from
> 3f70356edf56 and I get a "software IO TLB: Cannot allocate buffer"
> With the patch its a "software IO TLB: swiotlb_init_remap: failed
> to allocate tlb structure". So spot on & I feel like an idiot for
> not spotting that before!
> 
> Is failing being fatal valid, or should it fail gracefully like it
> used to do? To me, blissfully unaware about swiotlb, the "current"
> behaviour of failing gracefully makes more sense.

Given that we're at -rc6 I think the most important thing for now is to
avoid a regression and restore the old behavior.  I'll send out a
series with this and the nslab related fixes for Xen today.

But we should look into why allocating the memory fails for your
plaforms.  Does it have very little memory?  I can't really think
of why else the memblock allocation for swiotlb would fail.

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>
To: Conor.Dooley@microchip.com
Cc: hch@lst.de, sfr@canb.auug.org.au, linux-next@vger.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org,
	Mike Rapoport <rppt@kernel.org>
Subject: Re: linux-next: Tree for May 3
Date: Wed, 11 May 2022 14:37:24 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20220511123724.GA25121@lst.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <2c0e2fbe-4e45-4acc-c2a7-4f4dcf9161a3@microchip.com>

On Wed, May 11, 2022 at 10:10:40AM +0000, Conor.Dooley@microchip.com wrote:
> Without even trying the patch, I double checked the boot log from
> 3f70356edf56 and I get a "software IO TLB: Cannot allocate buffer"
> With the patch its a "software IO TLB: swiotlb_init_remap: failed
> to allocate tlb structure". So spot on & I feel like an idiot for
> not spotting that before!
> 
> Is failing being fatal valid, or should it fail gracefully like it
> used to do? To me, blissfully unaware about swiotlb, the "current"
> behaviour of failing gracefully makes more sense.

Given that we're at -rc6 I think the most important thing for now is to
avoid a regression and restore the old behavior.  I'll send out a
series with this and the nslab related fixes for Xen today.

But we should look into why allocating the memory fails for your
plaforms.  Does it have very little memory?  I can't really think
of why else the memblock allocation for swiotlb would fail.

_______________________________________________
linux-riscv mailing list
linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-riscv

  reply	other threads:[~2022-05-11 12:37 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 46+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2022-05-03  7:29 linux-next: Tree for May 3 Stephen Rothwell
2022-05-04  8:32 ` Conor.Dooley
2022-05-04  8:32   ` Conor.Dooley
2022-05-09 13:33   ` Conor.Dooley
2022-05-09 13:33     ` Conor.Dooley
2022-05-09 14:11     ` Christoph Hellwig
2022-05-09 14:11       ` Christoph Hellwig
2022-05-09 14:39       ` Conor.Dooley
2022-05-09 14:39         ` Conor.Dooley
2022-05-10 11:20         ` Conor.Dooley
2022-05-10 11:20           ` Conor.Dooley
2022-05-11  6:22           ` Christoph Hellwig
2022-05-11  6:22             ` Christoph Hellwig
2022-05-11  6:44             ` Conor.Dooley
2022-05-11  6:44               ` Conor.Dooley
2022-05-11  6:48               ` Christoph Hellwig
2022-05-11  6:48                 ` Christoph Hellwig
2022-05-11 10:10                 ` Conor.Dooley
2022-05-11 10:10                   ` Conor.Dooley
2022-05-11 12:37                   ` Christoph Hellwig [this message]
2022-05-11 12:37                     ` Christoph Hellwig
2022-05-11 14:08                     ` Mike Rapoport
2022-05-11 14:08                       ` Mike Rapoport
2022-05-11 14:10                       ` Christoph Hellwig
2022-05-11 14:10                         ` Christoph Hellwig
2022-05-11 14:37                         ` Mike Rapoport
2022-05-11 14:37                           ` Mike Rapoport
2022-05-11 14:40                           ` Christoph Hellwig
2022-05-11 14:40                             ` Christoph Hellwig
2022-05-13  7:55                     ` Conor.Dooley
2022-05-13  7:55                       ` Conor.Dooley
2022-05-14 12:18                   ` Geert Uytterhoeven
2022-05-14 12:18                     ` Geert Uytterhoeven
2022-05-16  9:47                     ` Conor.Dooley
2022-05-16  9:47                       ` Conor.Dooley
  -- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2024-05-03  7:17 Stephen Rothwell
2021-05-03  2:59 Stephen Rothwell
2019-05-03 10:00 Stephen Rothwell
2018-05-03  5:13 Stephen Rothwell
2017-05-03  5:54 Stephen Rothwell
2016-05-03  9:37 Stephen Rothwell
2013-05-03  4:10 Stephen Rothwell
2013-05-03  4:10 ` Stephen Rothwell
2012-05-03  6:38 Stephen Rothwell
2011-05-03  5:47 Stephen Rothwell
2010-05-03  5:16 Stephen Rothwell

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=20220511123724.GA25121@lst.de \
    --to=hch@lst.de \
    --cc=Conor.Dooley@microchip.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-next@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org \
    --cc=rppt@kernel.org \
    --cc=sfr@canb.auug.org.au \
    /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.