From: Alexandre Courbot <acourbot@nvidia.com>
To: Thierry Reding <thierry.reding@gmail.com>,
dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org
Cc: Alexandre Courbot <gnurou@gmail.com>,
Thomas Hellstrom <thellstrom@vmware.com>,
Allen Martin <amartin@nvidia.com>, Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>,
Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk <konrad.wilk@oracle.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC] drm/ttm: dma: Fixes for 32-bit and 64-bit ARM
Date: Mon, 8 Dec 2014 17:19:03 +0900 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <54855EF7.8050900@nvidia.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <54855D4B.50307@nvidia.com>
On 12/08/2014 05:11 PM, Alexandre Courbot wrote:
> On 12/08/2014 04:14 PM, Alexandre Courbot wrote:
>> On 11/12/2014 09:39 PM, Thierry Reding wrote:
>>> From: Thierry Reding <treding@nvidia.com>
>>>
>>> dma_alloc_coherent() returns a kernel virtual address that is part of
>>> the linear range. Passing such an address to virt_to_page() is illegal
>>> on non-coherent architectures. This causes the kernel to oops on 64-bit
>>> ARM because the struct page * obtained from virt_to_page() points to
>>> unmapped memory.
>>>
>>> This commit fixes this by using phys_to_page() since we get a physical
>>> address from dma_alloc_coherent(). Note that this is not a proper fix
>>> because if an IOMMU is set up to translate addresses for the GPU this
>>> address will be an I/O virtual address rather than a physical one. The
>>> proper fix probably involves not getting a pointer to the struct page
>>> in the first place, but that would be a much more intrusive change, if
>>> at all possible.
>>>
>>> Until that time, this temporary fix will allow TTM to work on 32-bit
>>> and 64-bit ARM as well, provided that no IOMMU translations are enabled
>>> for the GPU.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Thierry Reding <treding@nvidia.com>
>>> ---
>>> Arnd, I realize that this isn't a proper fix according to what we
>>> discussed on
>>> IRC yesterday, but I can't see a way to remove access to the pages
>>> array that
>>> would be as simple as this. I've marked this as RFC in the hope that
>>> it will
>>> trigger some discussion that will lead to a proper solution.
>>>
>>> drivers/gpu/drm/ttm/ttm_page_alloc_dma.c | 4 ++++
>>> 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/ttm/ttm_page_alloc_dma.c
>>> b/drivers/gpu/drm/ttm/ttm_page_alloc_dma.c
>>> index c96db433f8af..d7993985752c 100644
>>> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/ttm/ttm_page_alloc_dma.c
>>> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/ttm/ttm_page_alloc_dma.c
>>> @@ -343,7 +343,11 @@ static struct dma_page
>>> *__ttm_dma_alloc_page(struct dma_pool *pool)
>>> &d_page->dma,
>>> pool->gfp_flags);
>>> if (d_page->vaddr)
>>> +#if defined(CONFIG_ARM) || defined(CONFIG_ARM64)
>>> + d_page->p = phys_to_page(d_page->dma);
>>> +#else
>>> d_page->p = virt_to_page(d_page->vaddr);
>>> +#endif
>>
>> Since I am messing with the IOMMU I just happened to have hit the issue
>> you are mentioning. Wouldn't the following work:
>>
>> - if (d_page->vaddr)
>> -#if defined(CONFIG_ARM) || defined(CONFIG_ARM64)
>> - d_page->p = phys_to_page(d_page->dma);
>> -#else
>> - d_page->p = virt_to_page(d_page->vaddr);
>> -#endif
>> - else {
>> + if (d_page->vaddr) {
>> + if (is_vmalloc_addr(d_page->vaddr)) {
>> + d_page->p = vmalloc_to_page(d_page->vaddr);
>> + } else {
>> + d_page->p = virt_to_page(d_page->vaddr);
>> + }
>> + } else {
>>
>> A remapped page will end up in the vmalloc range of the address space,
>> and in this case we can use vmalloc_to_page() to get the right page.
>> Pages outside of this range are part of the linear mapping and can be
>> resolved using virt_to_page().
>>
>> Jetson seems to be mostly happy with this, although I sometimes get the
>> following trace:
>>
>> [ 13.174763] kernel BUG at ../mm/slab.c:2593!
>> [ 13.174767] Internal error: Oops - BUG: 0 [#1] PREEMPT SMP ARM
>> [ 13.174790] Modules linked in: nouveau_platform(O+) nouveau(O)
>> cfbfillrect cfbimgblt cfbcopyarea ttm
>> ...
>> [ 13.175234] [<c00de238>] (cache_alloc_refill) from [<c00de528>]
>> (__kmalloc+0x100/0x13c)
>> [ 13.175247] [<c00de528>] (__kmalloc) from [<c001d564>]
>> (arm_iommu_alloc_attrs+0x94/0x3a8)
>> [ 13.175269] [<c001d564>] (arm_iommu_alloc_attrs) from [<bf008f4c>]
>> (ttm_dma_populate+0x498/0x76c [ttm])
>> [ 13.175294] [<bf008f4c>] (ttm_dma_populate [ttm]) from [<bf000bb8>]
>> (ttm_tt_bind+0x38/0x68 [ttm])
>> [ 13.175315] [<bf000bb8>] (ttm_tt_bind [ttm]) from [<bf00298c>]
>> (ttm_bo_handle_move_mem+0x408/0x47c [ttm])
>> [ 13.175337] [<bf00298c>] (ttm_bo_handle_move_mem [ttm]) from
>> [<bf003758>] (ttm_bo_validate+0x220/0x22c [ttm])
>> [ 13.175359] [<bf003758>] (ttm_bo_validate [ttm]) from [<bf003984>]
>> (ttm_bo_init+0x220/0x338 [ttm])
>> [ 13.175480] [<bf003984>] (ttm_bo_init [ttm]) from [<bf0c70a0>]
>> (nouveau_bo_new+0x1c0/0x294 [nouveau])
>> [ 13.175688] [<bf0c70a0>] (nouveau_bo_new [nouveau]) from [<bf0ce88c>]
>> (nv84_fence_create+0x1cc/0x240 [nouveau])
>> [ 13.175891] [<bf0ce88c>] (nv84_fence_create [nouveau]) from
>> [<bf0cec90>] (nvc0_fence_create+0xc/0x24 [nouveau])
>> [ 13.176094] [<bf0cec90>] (nvc0_fence_create [nouveau]) from
>> [<bf0c1480>] (nouveau_accel_init+0xec/0x450 [nouveau])
>>
>> I suspect this is related to this change, but it might also be the
>> side-effect of another bug in my code.
>
> Ok, I finally understand where this trace comes from.
>
> slab.c:2593:
> BUG_ON(flags & GFP_SLAB_BUG_MASK);
>
> gfp.h:
> #define GFP_SLAB_BUG_MASK (__GFP_DMA32|__GFP_HIGHMEM|~__GFP_BITS_MASK)
>
> and ttm_dma_populate() calls ttm_dma_pool_init() with gfp_flags ==
> GFP_HIGHUSER, which includes __GFP_HIGHMEM. Somehow these flags are
> propagated through arm_iommu_alloc_attrs() up to the slab allocator,
> which meets this BUG_ON() when it needs to grow its cache.
>
> Note that ttm_dma_pool_init() can also be called with GFP_DMA32, which
> will trigger the same error.
>
> So although I am still not sure how this should be fixed, it seems like
> this has nothing to do with the change I am proposing.
>
> Temporary workaround:
>
> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/ttm/ttm_page_alloc_dma.c
> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/ttm/ttm_page_alloc_dma.c
> @@ -882,9 +882,9 @@ int ttm_dma_populate(struct ttm_dma_tt *ttm_dma,
> struct device *dev)
>
> type = ttm_to_type(ttm->page_flags, ttm->caching_state);
> if (ttm->page_flags & TTM_PAGE_FLAG_DMA32)
> - gfp_flags = GFP_USER | GFP_DMA32;
> + gfp_flags = GFP_USER;
> else
> - gfp_flags = GFP_HIGHUSER;
> + gfp_flags = GFP_USER;
> if (ttm->page_flags & TTM_PAGE_FLAG_ZERO_ALLOC)
> gfp_flags |= __GFP_ZERO;
>
> ... which obviously doesn't look right.
This, however, looks better:
diff --git a/arch/arm/mm/dma-mapping.c b/arch/arm/mm/dma-mapping.c
index e8907117861e..bc495354c802 100644
--- a/arch/arm/mm/dma-mapping.c
+++ b/arch/arm/mm/dma-mapping.c
@@ -1106,7 +1106,7 @@ static struct page **__iommu_alloc_buffer(struct
device *dev, size_t size,
int i = 0;
if (array_size <= PAGE_SIZE)
- pages = kzalloc(array_size, gfp);
+ pages = kzalloc(array_size, GFP_KERNEL);
else
pages = vzalloc(array_size);
if (!pages)
I don't see any reason why the array of pages should be allocated with
the same properties as the buffer itself. Looks like this is a DMA
allocator bug. Sorry about the noise.
Alex.
_______________________________________________
dri-devel mailing list
dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org
http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2014-12-08 8:19 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2014-11-12 12:39 [RFC] drm/ttm: dma: Fixes for 32-bit and 64-bit ARM Thierry Reding
2014-11-12 14:18 ` Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk
2014-11-12 17:03 ` Arnd Bergmann
2014-12-01 16:43 ` Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk
2014-12-08 7:14 ` Alexandre Courbot
2014-12-08 7:36 ` Alexandre Courbot
2014-12-08 8:11 ` Alexandre Courbot
2014-12-08 8:19 ` Alexandre Courbot [this message]
2014-12-15 8:04 ` Alexandre Courbot
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=54855EF7.8050900@nvidia.com \
--to=acourbot@nvidia.com \
--cc=amartin@nvidia.com \
--cc=arnd@arndb.de \
--cc=dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org \
--cc=gnurou@gmail.com \
--cc=konrad.wilk@oracle.com \
--cc=thellstrom@vmware.com \
--cc=thierry.reding@gmail.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.