Linux PCI subsystem development
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Leon Romanovsky <leon@kernel.org>
To: Pranjal Shrivastava <praan@google.com>
Cc: linux-nfs@vger.kernel.org, Trond Myklebust <trondmy@kernel.org>,
	Anna Schumaker <anna@kernel.org>, Chuck Lever <cel@kernel.org>,
	Jeff Layton <jlayton@kernel.org>,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>,
	Logan Gunthorpe <logang@deltatee.com>,
	Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@ziepe.ca>,
	linux-pci@vger.kernel.org, linux-rdma@vger.kernel.org,
	Shivaji Kant <shivajikant@google.com>,
	Tom Talpey <tom@talpey.com>,
	Unnati Sachan <unnatisachan@google.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v1 4/8] xprtrdma: return -EREMOTEIO on P2PDMA map failure
Date: Tue, 3 Nov 2026 15:28:00 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20261103132800.GI264423@unreal> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <auCRpd73dok7Yys7@google.com>

On Tue, Oct 27, 2026 at 11:57:25AM +0000, Pranjal Shrivastava wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 12, 2026 at 10:01:34AM +0300, Leon Romanovsky wrote:
> > On Tue, Oct 06, 2026 at 11:32:44PM +0000, Pranjal Shrivastava wrote:
> > > ib_dma_map_sg() returns 0 on any failure, so frwr_map() cannot tell
> > > why a mapping failed and reports -EIO. Use ib_dma_map_sgtable_attrs()
> > > instead, which returns the reason. Pass up -EREMOTEIO, which means
> > > the device cannot reach the P2PDMA memory, so the RPC fails with the
> > > same error as other P2PDMA refusals. Every other mapping failure
> > > still returns -EIO.
> > > 
> > > Signed-off-by: Pranjal Shrivastava <praan@google.com>
> > > ---
> > >  net/sunrpc/xprtrdma/frwr_ops.c | 15 ++++++++++-----
> > >  1 file changed, 10 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
> > > 
> > > diff --git a/net/sunrpc/xprtrdma/frwr_ops.c b/net/sunrpc/xprtrdma/frwr_ops.c
> > > index e83cef19e656..a55d5e11c0e2 100644
> > > --- a/net/sunrpc/xprtrdma/frwr_ops.c
> > > +++ b/net/sunrpc/xprtrdma/frwr_ops.c
> > > @@ -293,7 +293,8 @@ int frwr_map(struct rpcrdma_xprt *r_xprt,
> > >  	bool sg_gaps = ep->re_mrtype == IB_MR_TYPE_SG_GAPS;
> > >  	unsigned int max_depth = ep->re_max_fr_depth;
> > >  	struct ib_reg_wr *reg_wr;
> > > -	int i, n, dma_nents;
> > > +	struct sg_table sgt;
> > > +	int i, n, dma_nents, ret;
> > >  	struct ib_mr *ibmr;
> > >  	u8 key;
> > >  
> > > @@ -381,10 +382,13 @@ int frwr_map(struct rpcrdma_xprt *r_xprt,
> > >  	mr->mr_dir = rpcrdma_data_dir(writing);
> > >  	mr->mr_nents = i;
> > >  
> > > -	dma_nents = ib_dma_map_sg(ep->re_id->device, mr->mr_sg, mr->mr_nents,
> > > -				  mr->mr_dir);
> > > -	if (!dma_nents)
> > > +	/* Unlike ib_dma_map_sg(), this reports why a mapping failed */
> > > +	sgt.sgl = mr->mr_sg;
> > > +	sgt.orig_nents = mr->mr_nents;
> > > +	ret = ib_dma_map_sgtable_attrs(ep->re_id->device, &sgt, mr->mr_dir, 0);
> > 
> > Please avoid using this function. We are gradually moving away from SG tables
> > in the RDMA code.
> > 
> > In general, it is never good thing to built API around try-and-fail
> > approach. It will require from us to be aware of "specific" usage for
> > the return value from one subsystem by another.
> > 
> 
> Fair, I'll drop ib_dma_map_sgtable_attrs(), keep ib_dma_map_sg() as it 
> is today, and check reachability explicitly before mapping instead.
> 
> rpcrdma_p2pdma_allowed() already asks ib_dma_pci_p2p_dma_supported()
> whether the device can do P2PDMA at all. It would also run
> pci_p2pdma_state() against the device's dma_device for the payload
> pages, and refuse the RPC with -EREMOTEIO on
> PCI_P2PDMA_MAP_NOT_SUPPORTED. A mapping failure then stays a plain
> -EIO, and nothing depends on the DMA layer's return value.
> 
> xprtrdma can be built as a module, though, and pci_p2pdma_state() is
> an inline wrapper around __pci_p2pdma_update_state(), which isn't
> exported. I see two ways to handle that: export
> __pci_p2pdma_update_state() as is, or add a small exported helper in
> p2pdma.c that returns the map type for a page and a device, e.g.
> pci_p2pdma_page_map_type(). Which would you prefer?

This isn't my decision to make, but my understanding is that these functions
should not be exported. They are intended for use by subsystem core code,
which should export the processed results to its local callers.

Thanks

> 
> Thanks,
> Praan
> 

  reply	other threads:[~2026-11-03 13:33 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 24+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2026-10-06 23:32 [RFC PATCH v1 0/8] nfs: PCI P2PDMA for O_DIRECT over RDMA Pranjal Shrivastava
2026-10-06 23:32 ` [RFC PATCH v1 1/8] sunrpc: introduce XDRBUF_P2PDMA flag Pranjal Shrivastava
2026-10-06 23:41   ` sashiko-bot
2026-10-06 23:32 ` [RFC PATCH v1 2/8] sunrpc: fail only the RPC a transport refuses Pranjal Shrivastava
2026-10-06 23:41   ` sashiko-bot
2026-10-06 23:32 ` [RFC PATCH v1 3/8] xprtrdma: move P2PDMA payloads only via chunks Pranjal Shrivastava
2026-10-06 23:47   ` sashiko-bot
2026-10-06 23:32 ` [RFC PATCH v1 4/8] xprtrdma: return -EREMOTEIO on P2PDMA map failure Pranjal Shrivastava
2026-10-06 23:42   ` sashiko-bot
2026-10-12  7:01   ` Leon Romanovsky
2026-10-27 11:57     ` Pranjal Shrivastava
2026-11-03 13:28       ` Leon Romanovsky [this message]
2026-10-06 23:32 ` [RFC PATCH v1 5/8] nfs: tag READ/WRITE RPCs carrying P2PDMA pages Pranjal Shrivastava
2026-10-06 23:45   ` sashiko-bot
2026-10-12  7:10   ` Leon Romanovsky
2026-10-27 11:44     ` Pranjal Shrivastava
2026-10-06 23:32 ` [RFC PATCH v1 6/8] nfs: refuse P2PDMA pages with krb5i and krb5p Pranjal Shrivastava
2026-10-06 23:46   ` sashiko-bot
2026-10-06 23:32 ` [RFC PATCH v1 7/8] nfs: allow LOCALIO for P2PDMA pages only as aligned direct I/O Pranjal Shrivastava
2026-10-06 23:51   ` sashiko-bot
2026-10-06 23:32 ` [RFC PATCH v1 8/8] nfs: allow P2PDMA pages for O_DIRECT on RDMA mounts Pranjal Shrivastava
2026-10-06 23:42   ` sashiko-bot
2026-10-07 21:20 ` [RFC PATCH v1 0/8] nfs: PCI P2PDMA for O_DIRECT over RDMA Chuck Lever
2026-11-02  7:08   ` Pranjal Shrivastava

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=20261103132800.GI264423@unreal \
    --to=leon@kernel.org \
    --cc=anna@kernel.org \
    --cc=cel@kernel.org \
    --cc=hch@lst.de \
    --cc=jgg@ziepe.ca \
    --cc=jlayton@kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-nfs@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-pci@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-rdma@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=logang@deltatee.com \
    --cc=praan@google.com \
    --cc=shivajikant@google.com \
    --cc=tom@talpey.com \
    --cc=trondmy@kernel.org \
    --cc=unnatisachan@google.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