From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from smarthost01b.sbp.mail.zen.net.uk (smarthost01b.sbp.mail.zen.net.uk [212.23.1.3]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 71B9E1AB520 for ; Wed, 31 Jul 2024 09:28:28 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=212.23.1.3 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1722418111; cv=none; b=DoHFNXZZW7VIwHXm4gy6nWVQ/PrjSf03YpVjG5pmk8ia+MrqKu9d62Um6HkleX3FuA02lOXvOTFhUpX0kC1FT3ZgB65a7G5G7MflRudwEvyDXWnG7f6PpDmnCAZYPr3BnfOUQ3qrwiUUMo9Nuk/FAu9hF38jBRdR/LB0ex3fOr0= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1722418111; c=relaxed/simple; bh=b4WwrNrAB82w9ZMnVIX1vYwLJA54i1+hcnf2OZkqHeI=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:MIME-Version:Content-Type: Content-Disposition; b=D2DcpmcjuMMk/Qind6E7sU5a/+kvX1x4sEgLuI7SHlekK7mZ8KfXj0EabbCWLsqURqKWP1icVEK13ggkG+Sc1CEqnAE90vfn54xt189tLy4ROwjUKaIYPTIy8/YARmMEuw6AS/4O7pK0slcZNH2J5RVg/ejXuhCrW1be//yz6eo= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=dingwall.me.uk; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=dingwall.me.uk; arc=none smtp.client-ip=212.23.1.3 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=dingwall.me.uk Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=dingwall.me.uk Received: from [217.155.64.189] (helo=mail0.xen.dingwall.me.uk) by smarthost01b.sbp.mail.zen.net.uk with esmtpsa (TLS1.0) tls TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_CBC_SHA (Exim 4.95) (envelope-from ) id 1sZ5d4-003RKq-Mp; Wed, 31 Jul 2024 09:28:19 +0000 Received: from localhost (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by mail0.xen.dingwall.me.uk (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8C68DA6BB0E; Wed, 31 Jul 2024 10:28:19 +0100 (BST) X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at dingwall.me.uk Received: from mail0.xen.dingwall.me.uk ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (mail0.xen.dingwall.me.uk [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id VhfW9aP--uLD; Wed, 31 Jul 2024 10:28:19 +0100 (BST) Received: from behemoth.dingwall.me.uk (behemoth.dingwall.me.uk [IPv6:2a02:8010:698e:302::c0a8:105]) by dingwall.me.uk (Postfix) with ESMTP id 56E4EA6BB0B; Wed, 31 Jul 2024 10:28:19 +0100 (BST) Received: by behemoth.dingwall.me.uk (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 35191D8DEF0; Wed, 31 Jul 2024 10:28:19 +0100 (BST) Date: Wed, 31 Jul 2024 10:28:19 +0100 From: James Dingwall To: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Cc: Juergen Gross , Stefano Stabellini Subject: megaraid_sas "Failed from megasas_init_fw 6539" under Xen Message-ID: Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline X-Originating-smarthost01b-IP: [217.155.64.189] Feedback-ID: 217.155.64.189 Hi, I've been having a problem booting a Dell system with an H355 controller (megaraid_sas) under Xen, bare metal is fine. The reported messages on modprobe are: FW now in Ready state Failed to set DMA mask Failed from megasas_init_fw 6539 I have narrowed the cause down to the conditional behaviour introduced in ad96ce3252dbab773cb343220662df3d84dd8e80 for default_swiotlb_limit() to support the CONFIG_SWIOTLB_DYNAMIC option and the change in 05ee774122bd4a2f298668d6d5fc9e7b685a5e31 to use that function for xen_swiotlb_dma_supported(). It looks like both of these changes were introduced for v6.6. If I rebuild the kernel with CONFIG_SWIOTLB_DYNAMIC=n the system will boot as expected. (I'm rebuilding an Ubuntu kernel where the default is CONFIG_SWIOTLB_DYNAMIC=y) It looks like megaraid_sas does something slightly unusual by using DMA_BIT_MASK(63) since 894169db12463cea08d0e2a9e35f42b291340e5a but I don't know if that is related. Should I expect the system to behave with CONFIG_SWIOTLB_DYNAMIC=y under Xen? Thanks, James