From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Thomas Monjalon Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 0/7] fix DMA mask check Date: Mon, 05 Nov 2018 01:03:14 +0100 Message-ID: <1581850.6WJm0uvOED@xps> References: <20181101195330.19464-1-alejandro.lucero@netronome.com> <925cecc0-503d-324d-3634-2ec0857ccffc@intel.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit Cc: dev@dpdk.org, Ferruh Yigit To: Alejandro Lucero Return-path: Received: from out3-smtp.messagingengine.com (out3-smtp.messagingengine.com [66.111.4.27]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 522A82082 for ; Mon, 5 Nov 2018 01:03:17 +0100 (CET) In-Reply-To: <925cecc0-503d-324d-3634-2ec0857ccffc@intel.com> List-Id: DPDK patches and discussions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: dev-bounces@dpdk.org Sender: "dev" 02/11/2018 19:38, Ferruh Yigit: > On 11/1/2018 7:53 PM, Alejandro Lucero wrote: > > A patchset sent introducing DMA mask checks has several critical > > issues precluding apps to execute. The patchset was reviewed and > > finally accepted after three versions. Obviously it did not go > > through the proper testing what can be explained, at least from my > > side, due to the big changes to the memory initialization code these > > last months. It turns out the patchset did work with legacy memory > > and I'm afraid that was mainly my testing. > > > > This patchset should solve the main problems reported: > > > > - deadlock duriing initialization > > - segmentation fault with secondary processes > > > > For solving the deadlock, a new API is introduced: > > > > rte_mem_check_dma_mask_safe/unsafe > > > > making the previous rte_mem_check_dma_mask the one those new functions > > end calling. A boolean param is used for calling rte_memseg_walk thread > > safe or thread unsafe. This second option is needed for avoiding the > > deadlock. > > > > For the secondary processes problem, the call to check the dma mask is > > avoided from code being executed before the memory initialization. > > Instead, a new API function, rte_mem_set_dma_mask is introduced, which > > will be used in those cases. The dma mask check is done once the memory > > initialization is completed. > > > > This last change implies the IOVA mode can not be set depending on IOMMU > > hardware limitations, and it is assumed IOVA VA is possible. If the dma > > mask check reports a problem after memory initilization, the error > > message includes now advice for trying with --iova-mode option set to > > pa. > > > > The patchet also includes the dma mask check for legacy memory and the > > no hugepage option. > > > > Finally, all the DMA mask API has been updated for using the same prefix > > than other EAL memory code. > > > > An initial version of this patchset has been tested by Intel DPDK > > Validation team and it seems it solves all the problems reported. This > > final patchset has the same functionality with minor changes. I have > > successfully tested the patchset with my limited testbench. > > > > v2: > > - modify error messages with more descriptive information > > - change safe/unsafe versions for dma check to previous one plus a > > thread_unsafe version. > > - use rte_eal_using_phys_addr instead of getuid > > - fix comments > > - reorder patches > > > > Alejandro Lucero (7): > > mem: fix call to DMA mask check > > mem: use proper prefix > > mem: add function for setting DMA mask > > bus/pci: avoid call to DMA mask check > > mem: modify error message for DMA mask check > > eal/mem: use DMA mask check for legacy memory > > mem: add thread unsafe version for checking DMA mask > > Tested-by: Ferruh Yigit > > Fixing the deadlock issue, and build/per-patch build is good. Applied, thanks