linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 2/2] ioatdma: add DMA

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Wed, 26 Jun 2013 16:55:21 -0700
From:	Jon Mason <jon.mason@...el.com>
To:	Dan Williams <djbw@...com>
Cc:	Vinod Koul <vinod.koul@...el.com>,
	Dave Jiang <dave.jiang@...el.com>,
	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] ioatdma: add DMA_PRIVATE capabilities flag

On Wed, Jun 19, 2013 at 01:44:08PM -0700, Dan Williams wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 19, 2013 at 1:10 PM, Jon Mason <jon.mason@...el.com> wrote:
> > On Wed, Jun 19, 2013 at 11:56:38AM -0700, Dan Williams wrote:
> >> On Wed, Jun 19, 2013 at 10:52 AM, Jon Mason <jon.mason@...el.com> wrote:
> >> >> DMA_PRIVATE here keeps all channels private, so they couldn't be used
> >> >> elsewhere, for example raid offload.  Do you need a private allocation
> >> >> or can you get away with a dynamically assigned channel?
> >> >
> >> > I would like to have a dedicated DMA engine.  async_tx could cause the
> >> > copies to complete out of order.  Do I need to add infrastructure to
> >> > allow for private channel usage, and when unused allow the channel to
> >> > be used by async_tx?
> >>
> >> Can NTB just call dma_find_channel() once and be done?  Also, async_tx
> >> will only get things out of order if you allow it to pick a new
> >> channel for every operation, but as long as you specify a dependency
> >> chain it will keep things in order (same as remembering the result of
> >> dma_find_channel).
> >
> > Neither of these allow a device exclusive access to a channel.  Is
> > this not something that is desired by other users of DMA Engines, or
> > do I have a unique usage model?
> >
> 
> Yes, ioatdma has never been used in a mixed model.  Other platforms
> are either using devicetree bindings for specifying channels to their
> master devices or are exclusively slave channels.  Other slave usage
> models require use of a dedicated channel, since NTB is alternating
> between cpu and dma it seems it could get away with using a "public"
> channel.

Unfortunately, the dma_find_channel model does not led itself to
optimal usage of the available channels, as it seems to give out the
same channel.  Adding some randomizer (or other way to spread the
channel selection over multiple channels) would be greatly
beneficial.

Alternatively, adding an async_memcpy_mmio function (and perhaps some
minimal size to use the DMA engine) would provide a solution that
would work.

However, dma_find_channel should be sufficient to get NTB use of DMA
engines out for review.  I'll clean it up and send it out shortly.
Thanks for the insight.

Thanks,
Jon
--
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/