Re: [PATCH v2 2/2] x86/mm/pat, drivers/media/ivtv: move pat warn and replace WARN() with pr_warn()

Andy Walls
2015-06-26T12:36:01Z

On Fri, 2015-06-26 at 10:45 +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> * Luis R. Rodriguez <mcgrof@suse.com> wrote:
>
> > On Thu, Jun 25, 2015 at 08:51:47AM +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> > >
> > > * Luis R. Rodriguez <mcgrof@do-not-panic.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > > From: "Luis R. Rodriguez" <mcgrof@suse.com>
> > > >
> > > > On built-in kernels this warning will always splat as this is part
> > > > of the module init. Fix that by shifting the PAT requirement check
> > > > out under the code that does the "quasi-probe" for the device. This
> > > > device driver relies on an existing driver to find its own devices,
> > > > it looks for that device driver and its own found devices, then
> > > > uses driver_for_each_device() to try to see if it can probe each of
> > > > those devices as a frambuffer device with ivtvfb_init_card(). We
> > > > tuck the PAT requiremenet check then on the ivtvfb_init_card()
> > > > call making the check at least require an ivtv device present
> > > > before complaining.
> > > >
> > > > Reported-by: Fengguang Wu <fengguang.wu@intel.com> [0-day test robot]
> > > > Signed-off-by: Luis R. Rodriguez <mcgrof@suse.com>
> > > > ---
> > > > drivers/media/pci/ivtv/ivtvfb.c | 15 +++++++++------
> > > > 1 file changed, 9 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
> > > >
> > > > diff --git a/drivers/media/pci/ivtv/ivtvfb.c b/drivers/media/pci/ivtv/ivtvfb.c
> > > > index 4cb365d..8b95eef 100644
> > > > --- a/drivers/media/pci/ivtv/ivtvfb.c
> > > > +++ b/drivers/media/pci/ivtv/ivtvfb.c
> > > > @@ -38,6 +38,8 @@
> > > > Foundation, Inc., 59 Temple Place, Suite 330, Boston, MA 02111-1307 USA
> > > > */
> > > >
> > > > +#define pr_fmt(fmt) KBUILD_MODNAME ": " fmt
> > > > +
> > > > #include <linux/module.h>
> > > > #include <linux/kernel.h>
> > > > #include <linux/fb.h>
> > > > @@ -1171,6 +1173,13 @@ static int ivtvfb_init_card(struct ivtv *itv)
> > > > {
> > > > int rc;
> > > >
> > > > +#ifdef CONFIG_X86_64
> > > > + if (pat_enabled()) {
> > > > + pr_warn("ivtvfb needs PAT disabled, boot with nopat kernel parameter\n");
> > > > + return -ENODEV;
> > > > + }
> > > > +#endif
> > > > +
> > > > if (itv->osd_info) {
> > > > IVTVFB_ERR("Card %d already initialised\n", ivtvfb_card_id);
> > > > return -EBUSY;
> > >
> > > Same argument as for ipath: why not make arch_phys_wc_add() fail on PAT and
> > > return -1, and check it in arch_phys_wc_del()?
> >
> > The arch_phys_wc_add() is a no-op for PAT systems but for PAT to work we need
> > not only need to add this in where we replace the MTRR call but we also need to
> > convert ioremap_nocache() calls to ioremap_wc() but only if things were split up
> > already.
>

Hi Ingo,

> We don't need to do that: for such legacy drivers we can fall back to UC just
> fine, and inform the user that by booting with 'nopat' the old behavior will be
> back...

This is really a "user experience" decision.

IMO anyone who is still using ivtvfb and an old conventional PCI PVR-350
to render, at SDTV resolution, an X Desktop display or video playback on
a television screen, isn't going to give a hoot about modern things like
PAT. The user will simply want the framebuffer performance they are
accustomed to having with their system. UC will probably yield
unsatisfactory performance for an ivtvfb framebuffer.

With that in mind, I would think it better to obviously and clearly
disable the ivtvfb framebuffer module with PAT enabled, so the user will
check the log and read the steps needed to obtain acceptable
performance.

Maybe that's me just wanting to head off the "poor ivtvfb performance
with latest kernel" bug reports.

Whatever the decision, my stock response to bug reports related to this
will always be "What do the logs say?".

Regards,
Andy