From: "Troy Mitchell" <troy.mitchell@linux.dev>
To: "Troy Mitchell" <troy.mitchell@linux.dev>,
"Paul Walmsley" <pjw@kernel.org>,
"Palmer Dabbelt" <palmer@dabbelt.com>,
"Albert Ou" <aou@eecs.berkeley.edu>,
"Alexandre Ghiti" <alex@ghiti.fr>
Cc: <linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org>, <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
<spacemit@lists.linux.dev>,
"Anirudh Srinivasan" <asrinivasan@oss.tenstorrent.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] riscv: mm: fix SWIOTLB initialization for systems with DRAM above 4GB
Date: Mon, 08 Jun 2026 09:22:03 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <DJ39VTKU26KY.108UFYXIALHBC@linux.dev> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20260429-fix-riscv-swiotlb-v2-1-fa99dfdfc94d@linux.dev>
On Wed Apr 29, 2026 at 7:41 PM CST, Troy Mitchell wrote:
> On RISC-V platforms where the entire physical memory (DRAM) resides
> above the 32-bit address space (i.e., above dma32_phys_limit), the
> current SWIOTLB initialization logic fails.
>
> This patch addresses two interconnected issues on such platforms:
>
> 1. Incorrect 32-bit DMA bounce assumption:
> The existing condition `max_pfn > PFN_DOWN(dma32_phys_limit)` assumes
> that a 32-bit DMA bounce buffer is required simply because the maximum
> PFN exceeds the 32-bit limit. However, if all DRAM starts above 4GB,
> no memory exists below the limit to satisfy this allocation. Fix
> this by adding a check to ensure `memblock_start_of_DRAM()` is actually
> below the 32-bit limit before enforcing 32-bit SWIOTLB.
>
> 2. kmalloc() bounce buffer allocation failure on non-coherent systems:
> For non-coherent hardware, a bounce buffer is still mandatory for
> cache-line-aligned kmalloc(), even if 32-bit DMA bouncing is skipped.
> Without the `SWIOTLB_ANY` flag, swiotlb_init() defaults to allocating
> from low memory, which fails completely when DRAM only exists in high
> memory. By appending `SWIOTLB_ANY` to swiotlb_flags, the allocator is
> permitted to allocate this alignment buffer from high memory.
>
> With this patch, systems with non-coherent DMA and DRAM entirely above
> 4GB can successfully map the software IO TLB in high memory and boot
> normally.
>
> Tested-by: Anirudh Srinivasan <asrinivasan@oss.tenstorrent.com>
> Signed-off-by: Troy Mitchell <troy.mitchell@linux.dev>
Just a gentle ping on this series.
Please let me know if anyone has any feedback or if there is anything
I should update.
- Troy
prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-06-08 1:22 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 2+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-04-29 11:41 [PATCH v2] riscv: mm: fix SWIOTLB initialization for systems with DRAM above 4GB Troy Mitchell
2026-06-08 1:22 ` Troy Mitchell [this message]
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=DJ39VTKU26KY.108UFYXIALHBC@linux.dev \
--to=troy.mitchell@linux.dev \
--cc=alex@ghiti.fr \
--cc=aou@eecs.berkeley.edu \
--cc=asrinivasan@oss.tenstorrent.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=palmer@dabbelt.com \
--cc=pjw@kernel.org \
--cc=spacemit@lists.linux.dev \
/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