From: linux@armlinux.org.uk (Russell King - ARM Linux)
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: [PATCH 1/1] ARM: dma: fix dma_max_pfn()
Date: Fri, 19 Aug 2016 00:07:54 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20160818230754.GE1041@n2100.armlinux.org.uk> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <8003b6ed-6071-9384-1b88-0b84604bdce8@oracle.com>
On Thu, Aug 18, 2016 at 09:55:55AM -0700, Santosh Shilimkar wrote:
> Hi Russell,
>
> On 8/18/2016 7:24 AM, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote:
> >On Wed, Aug 17, 2016 at 03:05:17PM +0300, Roger Quadros wrote:
> >>Since commit 6ce0d2001692 ("ARM: dma: Use dma_pfn_offset for dma address translation"),
> >>dma_to_pfn() already returns the PFN with the physical memory start offset
> >>so we don't need to add it again.
> >>
> >>This fixes USB mass storage lock-up problem on systems that can't do DMA
> >>over the entire physical memory range (e.g.) Keystone 2 systems with 4GB RAM
> >>can only do DMA over the first 2GB. [K2E-EVM].
> >>
> >>What happens there is that without this patch SCSI layer sets a wrong
> >>bounce buffer limit in scsi_calculate_bounce_limit() for the USB mass
> >>storage device. dma_max_pfn() evaluates to 0x8fffff and bounce_limit
> >>is set to 0x8fffff000 whereas maximum DMA'ble physical memory on Keystone 2
> >>is 0x87fffffff. This results in non DMA'ble pages being given to the
> >>USB controller and hence the lock-up.
> >>
> >>NOTE: in the above case, USB-SCSI-device's dma_pfn_offset was showing as 0.
> >>This should have really been 0x780000 as on K2e, LOWMEM_START is 0x80000000
> >>and HIGHMEM_START is 0x800000000. DMA zone is 2GB so dma_max_pfn should be
> >>0x87ffff. The incorrect dma_pfn_offset for the USB storage device is because
> >>USB devices are not correctly inheriting the dma_pfn_offset from the
> >>USB host controller. This will be fixed by a separate patch.
> >
> >I'd like to hear from Santosh, as the author of the original change.
> >The original commit doesn't mention which platform it was intended for
> >or what the problem was, which would've been helpful.
> >
> From what I recollect, we did these changes to make the max pfn behave
> same on ARM arch as other archs. This patch was evolved as part of
> fixing the max*pfn assumption.
To me, the proposed patch _looks_ correct, because...
> >>diff --git a/arch/arm/include/asm/dma-mapping.h b/arch/arm/include/asm/dma-mapping.h
> >>index d009f79..bf02dbd 100644
> >>--- a/arch/arm/include/asm/dma-mapping.h
> >>+++ b/arch/arm/include/asm/dma-mapping.h
> >>@@ -111,7 +111,7 @@ static inline dma_addr_t virt_to_dma(struct device *dev, void *addr)
> >> /* The ARM override for dma_max_pfn() */
> >> static inline unsigned long dma_max_pfn(struct device *dev)
> >> {
> >>- return PHYS_PFN_OFFSET + dma_to_pfn(dev, *dev->dma_mask);
> >>+ return dma_to_pfn(dev, *dev->dma_mask);
> >> }
> >> #define dma_max_pfn(dev) dma_max_pfn(dev)
> By doing this change I hope we don't break other drivers on Keystone so
> am not sure about the change.
dma_to_pfn() returns the page frame number referenced from physical
address zero - the default implementation of dma_to_pfn() is
bus_to_pfn(), which is __phys_to_pfn(x), which is just x >> PAGE_SHIFT.
The other thing about dma_to_pfn() is that it should return a
zero-referenced PFN number, where PFN 0 = physical address 0.
If there is some offset for keystone2, that should be taken care of
via "dev->dma_pfn_offset", and not offsetting the return value from
dma_to_pfn().
So I'm 99.9% convinced that the proposed change is correct.
--
RMK's Patch system: http://www.armlinux.org.uk/developer/patches/
FTTC broadband for 0.8mile line: currently at 9.6Mbps down 400kbps up
according to speedtest.net.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2016-08-18 23:07 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2016-08-17 12:05 [PATCH 0/1] ARM: Keystone: Fix USB Mass storage on K2E Roger Quadros
2016-08-17 12:05 ` [PATCH 1/1] ARM: dma: fix dma_max_pfn() Roger Quadros
2016-08-18 14:24 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2016-08-18 16:55 ` Santosh Shilimkar
2016-08-18 23:07 ` Russell King - ARM Linux [this message]
2016-08-19 2:01 ` Santosh Shilimkar
2016-08-19 7:30 ` Roger Quadros
2016-08-19 16:38 ` Santosh Shilimkar
2016-09-12 11:38 ` Roger Quadros
2016-09-28 7:53 ` Roger Quadros
2016-09-28 8:46 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
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=20160818230754.GE1041@n2100.armlinux.org.uk \
--to=linux@armlinux.org.uk \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
/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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).