From: Laurent Pinchart <laurentp@cse-semaphore.com>
To: Ben Dooks <ben-linux@fluff.org>, g@trinity.fluff.org
Cc: Ben Dooks <ben-linux@fluff.org>, netdev@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: DM9000 issue with mem resource management
Date: Mon, 9 Jun 2008 15:41:41 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <200806091541.44258.laurentp@cse-semaphore.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20080607213504.GA31817@trinity.fluff.org>
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 4521 bytes --]
Hi Ben,
On Saturday 07 June 2008 23:35, Ben Dooks, g@trinity.fluff.org wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 06, 2008 at 11:01:42AM +0200, Laurent Pinchart wrote:
> > Hi Ben,
> >
> > On Thursday 05 June 2008 19:40, Ben Dooks wrote:
> > > On Thu, Jun 05, 2008 at 05:42:58PM +0200, Laurent Pinchart wrote:
> > > > Hi everybody,
> > > >
> > > > I ran into a resource-related bug in the DM9000 driver.
> > > >
> > > > When the platform device has only 2 resources, dm9000_probe() doesn't
> > > > set db->irq_res, which results in a segfault when the pointer gets
> > > > dereferenced in dm9000_open().
> > > >
> > > > I tried to fix the issue, and found out that the resource management
> > > > code is quite broken.
> > >
> > > Personally, I'm thinking about just removing the case for 2, and making
> > > it three resources only. The following in-kernel machines use the
> > > following resources:
> > >
> > > arch/arm/mach-at91/board-sam9261ek.c 3
> > > arch/arm/mach-pxa/cm-x270.c 3
> > > arch/arm/mach-pxa/em-x270.c 3
> > > arch/arm/mach-pxa/trizeps4.c 3
> > > arch/arm/mach-pxa/colibri.c 3
> > > arch/arm/mach-s3c2410/mach-bast.c 3
> > > arch/arm/mach-s3c2410/mach-vr1000.c 3
> > > arch/blackfin/mach-bf527/boards/ezkit.c 2
> > > arch/blackfin/mach-bf533/boards/H8606.c 2
> > > arch/blackfin/mach-bf533/boards/ip0x.c 3
> > > arch/blackfin/mach-bf537/boards/generic_board.c 2
> > > arch/blackfin/mach-bf537/boards/stamp.c 2
> > >
> > > As you can see, the #3 outweigh the #2. Unless anyone else objects, I
> > > will add a patch to reduce this to the case where the driver expects
> > > 3 resources, and ask the users of #2 to submit changes for their
> > > bots.
> > >
> > > > If I understand things correctly, specifying 3 resources makes the
> > > > DM9000 driver ioremap() the memory, while specifying 2 resources
> > > > implies that the platform code already ioremap()ed the memory. Is that
> > > > right ?
> > > >
> > > > If so, why does dm9000_probe() call request_mem_region() on
> > > > ioremap()ed memory ?
> > >
> > > Hmm, dunno. I really have no idea why this happened. I don't think this
> > > was my fault!
> > >
> > > > Wouldn't it also be simpler to use release_mem_region() in
> > > > dm9000_release_board() instead of release_resource() + kfree() ?
> > >
> > > If you already have the resource, this is a reasonably simple way of
> > > ensuring you're disposing of the right resource.
> > >
> > > > I'd be grateful if someone could confirm my assumptions. I'll then
> > > > submit a patch to fix those issues.
> > >
> > > My recommendation is that we remove the 2 case completely, so I'd not
> > > bother trying to fix this.
> >
> > I'm not too sure on that one.
>
> Well, having thought about it some more, the 2 address case is also an
> abuse of the IORESOURCE mechanism with platform devices, as the core
> driver code uses the .start and .end to register with the relevant
> iomem reservation code.
Agreed.
> I'm going more strongly on removing the #2 case unless anyone can come up
> with a really compelling reason to keep it.
Ok. I'll submit a patch.
BTW, why do the some boards declare the data resource as more than 4 bytes
long ?
> > I have DM9000 chips on a custom bus. The bus code remaps the whole address
> > range (32 bytes per card x 32 slots) in one go and initializes the
> > resource with a subset of the remapped range.
> >
> > Converting that to per-slot ioremaps would create many more mappings. Is
> > that an issue (performance-wise, or in term of a maximum number of
> > mappings if there is a limit) ? I will still need a global mapping, as the
> > bus code needs to access configuration registers on the individual cards,
> > so I won't be able to request_mem_region both the global mapping and the
> > individual mappings.
> > I'm not sure if that's an issue.
>
> That sounds like a problem with the bus code mapping too much of the memory
> and thus causing a problem for any subsequent drivers.
That's right. It had been done that way to save mappings. Without a global
mapping I'll need 64 mappings instead of 1.
> Having an extra mapping in is only a minor problem compared with the other
> travesty the 2 region case is currently causing.
What about 63 extra mappings ?
--
Laurent Pinchart
CSE Semaphore Belgium
Chaussee de Bruxelles, 732A
B-1410 Waterloo
Belgium
T +32 (2) 387 42 59
F +32 (2) 387 42 75
[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2008-06-09 13:41 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2008-06-05 15:42 DM9000 issue with mem resource management Laurent Pinchart
2008-06-05 17:40 ` Ben Dooks
2008-06-06 9:01 ` Laurent Pinchart
2008-06-07 21:35 ` Ben Dooks, g
2008-06-09 13:41 ` Laurent Pinchart [this message]
2008-06-06 9:11 ` Laurent Pinchart
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=200806091541.44258.laurentp@cse-semaphore.com \
--to=laurentp@cse-semaphore.com \
--cc=ben-linux@fluff.org \
--cc=g@trinity.fluff.org \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
/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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).