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: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.
[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date:	Tue, 30 Jul 2013 23:49:39 -0500
From:	Joel Fernandes <joelf@...com>
To:	Sekhar Nori <nsekhar@...com>
CC:	Tony Lindgren <tony@...mide.com>,
	Santosh Shilimkar <santosh.shilimkar@...com>,
	Sricharan R <r.sricharan@...com>,
	Rajendra Nayak <rnayak@...com>,
	Lokesh Vutla <lokeshvutla@...com>,
	Matt Porter <matt@...orter.com>,
	Grant Likely <grant.likely@...retlab.ca>,
	Rob Herring <rob.herring@...xeda.com>,
	Vinod Koul <vinod.koul@...el.com>, Dan Williams <djbw@...com>,
	Mark Brown <broonie@...aro.org>,
	Benoit Cousson <benoit.cousson@...aro.org>,
	Russell King <linux@....linux.org.uk>,
	Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>, Olof Johansson <olof@...om.net>,
	Balaji TK <balajitk@...com>,
	Gururaja Hebbar <gururaja.hebbar@...com>,
	Chris Ball <cjb@...top.org>,
	Jason Kridner <jkridner@...gleboard.org>,
	Linux OMAP List <linux-omap@...r.kernel.org>,
	Linux ARM Kernel List <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
	Linux DaVinci Kernel List 
	<davinci-linux-open-source@...ux.davincidsp.com>,
	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Linux MMC List <linux-mmc@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/9] dma: edma: Find missed events and issue them

Hi Sekhar,

On 07/30/2013 02:05 AM, Sekhar Nori wrote:
> On Monday 29 July 2013 06:59 PM, Joel Fernandes wrote:
>> In an effort to move to using Scatter gather lists of any size with
>> EDMA as discussed at [1] instead of placing limitations on the driver,
>> we work through the limitations of the EDMAC hardware to find missed
>> events and issue them.
>>
>> The sequence of events that require this are:
>>
>> For the scenario where MAX slots for an EDMA channel is 3:
>>
>> SG1 -> SG2 -> SG3 -> SG4 -> SG5 -> SG6 -> Null
>>
>> The above SG list will have to be DMA'd in 2 sets:
>>
>> (1) SG1 -> SG2 -> SG3 -> Null
>> (2) SG4 -> SG5 -> SG6 -> Null
>>
>> After (1) is succesfully transferred, the events from the MMC controller
>> donot stop coming and are missed by the time we have setup the transfer
>> for (2). So here, we catch the events missed as an error condition and
>> issue them manually.
> 
> Are you sure there wont be any effect of these missed events on the
> peripheral side. For example, wont McASP get into an underrun condition
> when it encounters a null PaRAM set? Even UART has to transmit to a

But it will not encounter null PaRAM set because McASP uses contiguous
buffers for transfer which are not scattered across physical memory.
This can be accomplished with an SG of size 1. For such SGs, this patch
series leaves it linked Dummy and does not link to Null set. Null set is
only used for SG lists that are > MAX_NR_SG in size such as those
created for example by MMC and Crypto.

> particular baud so I guess it cannot wait like the way MMC/SD can.

Existing driver have to wait anyway if they hit MAX SG limit today. If
they don't want to wait, they would have allocated a contiguous block of
memory and DMA that in one stretch so they don't lose any events, and in
such cases we are not linking to Null.

> Also, wont this lead to under-utilization of the peripheral bandwith?
> Meaning, MMC/SD is ready with data but cannot transfer because the DMA
> is waiting to be set-up.

But it is waiting anyway even today. Currently based on MAX segs, MMC
driver/subsystem will make SG list of size max_segs. Between these
sessions of creating such smaller SG-lists, if for some reason the MMC
controller is sending events, these will be lost anyway.

What will happen now with this patch series is we are simply accepting a
bigger list than this, and handling all the max_segs stuff within the
EDMA driver itself without outside world knowing. This is actually more
efficient as for long transfers, we are not going back and forth much
between the client and EDMA driver.

> Did you consider a ping-pong scheme with say three PaRAM sets per
> channel? That way you can keep a continuous transfer going on from the
> peripheral over the complete SG list.

Do you mean ping-pong scheme as used in the davinci-pcm driver today?
This can be used only for buffers that are contiguous in memory, not
those that are scattered across memory.

Thanks,

-Joel
--
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

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ