Linux PCI subsystem development
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Bjorn Helgaas <helgaas@kernel.org>
To: George Cherian <george.cherian@marvell.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-arch@vger.kernel.org,
	linux-pci@vger.kernel.org, bhelgaas@google.com, arnd@arndb.de,
	"Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCHv2] PCI: Add pci_iounmap
Date: Thu, 20 Aug 2020 16:55:49 -0500	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20200820215549.GA1569713@bjorn-Precision-5520> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20200820050306.2015009-1-george.cherian@marvell.com>

[+cc Michael, author of 66eab4df288a ("lib: add GENERIC_PCI_IOMAP")]

On Thu, Aug 20, 2020 at 10:33:06AM +0530, George Cherian wrote:
> In case if any architecture selects CONFIG_GENERIC_PCI_IOMAP and not
> CONFIG_GENERIC_IOMAP, then the pci_iounmap function is reduced to a NULL
> function. Due to this the managed release variants or even the explicit
> pci_iounmap calls doesn't really remove the mappings.
> 
> This issue is seen on an arm64 based system. arm64 by default selects
> only CONFIG_GENERIC_PCI_IOMAP and not CONFIG_GENERIC_IOMAP from this
> 'commit cb61f6769b88 ("ARM64: use GENERIC_PCI_IOMAP")'
> 
> Simple bind/unbind test of any pci driver using pcim_iomap/pci_iomap,
> would lead to the following error message after long hour tests
> 
> "allocation failed: out of vmalloc space - use vmalloc=<size> to
> increase size."
> 
> Signed-off-by: George Cherian <george.cherian@marvell.com>
> ---
> * Changes from v1
> 	- Fix the 0-day compilation error.
> 	- Mark the lib/iomap pci_iounmap call as weak incase 
> 	  if any architecture have there own implementation.
> 
>  include/asm-generic/io.h |  4 ++++
>  lib/pci_iomap.c          | 10 ++++++++++
>  2 files changed, 14 insertions(+)
> 
> diff --git a/include/asm-generic/io.h b/include/asm-generic/io.h
> index dabf8cb7203b..5986b37226b7 100644
> --- a/include/asm-generic/io.h
> +++ b/include/asm-generic/io.h
> @@ -915,12 +915,16 @@ static inline void iowrite64_rep(volatile void __iomem *addr,
>  struct pci_dev;
>  extern void __iomem *pci_iomap(struct pci_dev *dev, int bar, unsigned long max);
>  
> +#ifdef CONFIG_GENERIC_PCI_IOMAP
> +extern void pci_iounmap(struct pci_dev *dev, void __iomem *p);
> +#else
>  #ifndef pci_iounmap
>  #define pci_iounmap pci_iounmap
>  static inline void pci_iounmap(struct pci_dev *dev, void __iomem *p)
>  {
>  }
>  #endif
> +#endif /* CONFIG_GENERIC_PCI_IOMAP */
>  #endif /* CONFIG_GENERIC_IOMAP */
>  
>  /*
> diff --git a/lib/pci_iomap.c b/lib/pci_iomap.c
> index 2d3eb1cb73b8..ecd1eb3f6c25 100644
> --- a/lib/pci_iomap.c
> +++ b/lib/pci_iomap.c
> @@ -134,4 +134,14 @@ void __iomem *pci_iomap_wc(struct pci_dev *dev, int bar, unsigned long maxlen)
>  	return pci_iomap_wc_range(dev, bar, 0, maxlen);
>  }
>  EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(pci_iomap_wc);
> +
> +#ifndef CONFIG_GENERIC_IOMAP
> +#define pci_iounmap pci_iounmap
> +void __weak pci_iounmap(struct pci_dev *dev, void __iomem *addr);
> +void __weak pci_iounmap(struct pci_dev *dev, void __iomem *addr)
> +{
> +	iounmap(addr);
> +}
> +EXPORT_SYMBOL(pci_iounmap);
> +#endif

I completely agree that this looks like a leak that needs to be fixed.

But my head hurts after trying to understand pci_iomap() and
pci_iounmap().  I hate to add even more #ifdefs here.  Can't we
somehow rationalize this and put pci_iounmap() next to pci_iomap()?

66eab4df288a ("lib: add GENERIC_PCI_IOMAP") moved pci_iomap() from
lib/iomap.c to lib/pci_iomap.c, but left pci_iounmap() in lib/iomap.c.
There must be some good reason why they're separated, but I don't know
what it is.

>  #endif /* CONFIG_PCI */
> -- 
> 2.25.1
> 

  reply	other threads:[~2020-08-20 21:55 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2020-08-20  5:03 [PATCHv2] PCI: Add pci_iounmap George Cherian
2020-08-20 21:55 ` Bjorn Helgaas [this message]
2020-08-23  8:01   ` Michael S. Tsirkin
  -- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2020-08-21 16:58 George Cherian

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=20200820215549.GA1569713@bjorn-Precision-5520 \
    --to=helgaas@kernel.org \
    --cc=arnd@arndb.de \
    --cc=bhelgaas@google.com \
    --cc=george.cherian@marvell.com \
    --cc=linux-arch@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-pci@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mst@redhat.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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox