[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20091106114130J.fujita.tomonori@lab.ntt.co.jp>
Date: Fri, 6 Nov 2009 11:41:49 +0900
From: FUJITA Tomonori <fujita.tomonori@....ntt.co.jp>
To: alex.williamson@...com
Cc: dwmw2@...radead.org, iommu@...ts.linux-foundation.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, akpm@...ux-foundation.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] intel-iommu: Obey coherent_dma_mask for alloc_coherent
on passthrough
On Wed, 04 Nov 2009 15:59:34 -0700
Alex Williamson <alex.williamson@...com> wrote:
> intel_alloc_coherent() needs to follow DMA mapping convention and
> make use of the coherent_dma_mask of the device for identity mappings.
> Without this, devices may get buffers they can't use. This patch
> provides best effort allocations and fails the request if the mask
> requirements are not met rather than returning an unusable buffer.
>
> Signed-off-by: Alex Williamson <alex.williamson@...com>
> ---
>
> This patch fixes a regression introduced since 2.6.31 that prevents
> devices with a restricted coherent_dma_mask from working in passthrough
> mode.
>
> drivers/pci/intel-iommu.c | 12 ++++++++++--
> 1 files changed, 10 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/pci/intel-iommu.c b/drivers/pci/intel-iommu.c
> index b1e97e6..8283df9 100644
> --- a/drivers/pci/intel-iommu.c
> +++ b/drivers/pci/intel-iommu.c
> @@ -2582,7 +2582,7 @@ static dma_addr_t __intel_map_single(struct device *hwdev, phys_addr_t paddr,
> BUG_ON(dir == DMA_NONE);
>
> if (iommu_no_mapping(hwdev))
> - return paddr;
> + return paddr + size > dma_mask ? 0 : paddr;
You can use dma_capable(hwdev, paddr, size) here.
> domain = get_valid_domain_for_dev(pdev);
> if (!domain)
> @@ -2767,7 +2767,15 @@ static void *intel_alloc_coherent(struct device *hwdev, size_t size,
>
> size = PAGE_ALIGN(size);
> order = get_order(size);
> - flags &= ~(GFP_DMA | GFP_DMA32);
> +
> + if (!iommu_no_mapping(hwdev))
> + flags &= ~(GFP_DMA | GFP_DMA32);
> + else if (hwdev->coherent_dma_mask != DMA_BIT_MASK(64)) {
> + if (hwdev->coherent_dma_mask < DMA_BIT_MASK(32))
> + flags |= GFP_DMA;
> + else
> + flags |= GFP_DMA32;
> + }
This is fine for 2.6.32 but we'll cleanly fix this by using
swiotlb_dma_ops later, right?
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists