From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from bombadil.infradead.org (bombadil.infradead.org [198.137.202.133]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 94AB6C433EF for ; Wed, 11 May 2022 12:37:44 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=lists.infradead.org; s=bombadil.20210309; h=Sender: Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-Type:List-Subscribe:List-Help:List-Post: List-Archive:List-Unsubscribe:List-Id:In-Reply-To:MIME-Version:References: Message-ID:Subject:Cc:To:From:Date:Reply-To:Content-ID:Content-Description: Resent-Date:Resent-From:Resent-Sender:Resent-To:Resent-Cc:Resent-Message-ID: List-Owner; bh=vBs3pq1lLMQhb1IjjO0iqcQ6K+AyYTtSuMFW9aBzZgo=; b=CmLLMa3K2igNIO jBE1K2OOOtC+2XlftLBxxkIUAjEkIUOFuXPmYQ154+ymnebLa80xWV07fswTvuTcGQ7tfCHdqiWqU +1DM+Jy8L+sbir8xWGXl1Ep1sETzq3tchy2C8BRToICFLEPdd5R1CxSB0KcdJ8qmLSM4ZST3nWwvi jdwQGcOetfNU6MubtCy1E+yzjJ7NtW/nTN9uuNkvsI6WpAjThEXJHzbnkdDFNlnjdLpNX09yOdAkX qkcfqKdX7SzpECfSRHQyIpxkgRgdqqS0gZ0vPIulYO44CIUBaCFptznbfZzhIqWDDxFm4JQVIrW9M MvF7jQaBlPj0cAwLptgA==; Received: from localhost ([::1] helo=bombadil.infradead.org) by bombadil.infradead.org with esmtp (Exim 4.94.2 #2 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1nolax-006nbS-Al; Wed, 11 May 2022 12:37:35 +0000 Received: from verein.lst.de ([213.95.11.211]) by bombadil.infradead.org with esmtps (Exim 4.94.2 #2 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1nolau-006nZ6-9i for linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org; Wed, 11 May 2022 12:37:34 +0000 Received: by verein.lst.de (Postfix, from userid 2407) id CA5BC68C7B; Wed, 11 May 2022 14:37:24 +0200 (CEST) Date: Wed, 11 May 2022 14:37:24 +0200 From: Christoph Hellwig To: Conor.Dooley@microchip.com Cc: hch@lst.de, sfr@canb.auug.org.au, linux-next@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org, Mike Rapoport Subject: Re: linux-next: Tree for May 3 Message-ID: <20220511123724.GA25121@lst.de> References: <20220503172926.08215c77@canb.auug.org.au> <3f94c9a8-c927-5cc0-7d67-4b21c3d9dbaf@microchip.com> <9a424be9-380f-f99c-4126-25a00eba0271@microchip.com> <20220509141122.GA14555@lst.de> <505d41d1-1bc8-c8bc-5ebb-8a2b7934f3de@microchip.com> <20220511062232.GA32524@lst.de> <102578f2-5c10-e9c2-c1ef-e76ba90d011e@microchip.com> <20220511064832.GA761@lst.de> <2c0e2fbe-4e45-4acc-c2a7-4f4dcf9161a3@microchip.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <2c0e2fbe-4e45-4acc-c2a7-4f4dcf9161a3@microchip.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.17 (2007-11-01) X-CRM114-Version: 20100106-BlameMichelson ( TRE 0.8.0 (BSD) ) MR-646709E3 X-CRM114-CacheID: sfid-20220511_053732_523966_2679EA02 X-CRM114-Status: GOOD ( 13.77 ) X-BeenThere: linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.34 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: "linux-riscv" Errors-To: linux-riscv-bounces+linux-riscv=archiver.kernel.org@lists.infradead.org On Wed, May 11, 2022 at 10:10:40AM +0000, Conor.Dooley@microchip.com wrote: > Without even trying the patch, I double checked the boot log from > 3f70356edf56 and I get a "software IO TLB: Cannot allocate buffer" > With the patch its a "software IO TLB: swiotlb_init_remap: failed > to allocate tlb structure". So spot on & I feel like an idiot for > not spotting that before! > > Is failing being fatal valid, or should it fail gracefully like it > used to do? To me, blissfully unaware about swiotlb, the "current" > behaviour of failing gracefully makes more sense. Given that we're at -rc6 I think the most important thing for now is to avoid a regression and restore the old behavior. I'll send out a series with this and the nslab related fixes for Xen today. But we should look into why allocating the memory fails for your plaforms. Does it have very little memory? I can't really think of why else the memblock allocation for swiotlb would fail. _______________________________________________ linux-riscv mailing list linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-riscv