[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <552AE4A4.30005@dev.mellanox.co.il>
Date: Mon, 13 Apr 2015 00:33:24 +0300
From: Ido Shamay <idos@....mellanox.co.il>
To: David Daney <ddaney.cavm@...il.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
netdev@...r.kernel.org, linux-rdma@...r.kernel.org,
"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>
CC: Roland Dreier <roland@...nel.org>,
Sean Hefty <sean.hefty@...el.com>,
Hal Rosenstock <hal.rosenstock@...il.com>,
Amir Vadai <amirv@...lanox.com>,
Or Gerlitz <ogerlitz@...lanox.com>,
Yishai Hadas <yishaih@...lanox.com>,
Matan Barak <matanb@...lanox.com>,
Majd Dibbiny <majd@...lanox.com>,
Jack Morgenstein <jackm@....mellanox.co.il>,
Moni Shoua <monis@...lanox.com>,
Eugenia Emantayev <eugenia@...lanox.co.il>,
Saeed Mahameed <saeedm@...lanox.com>,
Yuval Atias <yuvala@...lanox.com>,
Maor Gottlieb <maorg@...lanox.com>,
David Daney <david.daney@...ium.com>, liranl@...lanox.com,
gdror@...lanox.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC] net/mlx4: Remove improper usage of dma_alloc_coherent().
On 4/7/2015 10:43 PM, Ido Shamay wrote:
> On 4/7/2015 2:00 AM, David Daney wrote:
>> From: David Daney <david.daney@...ium.com>
>>
>> The dma_alloc_coherent() function returns a virtual address which can
>> be used for coherent access to the underlying memory. On some
>> architectures, like arm64, undefined behavior results if this memory is
>> also accessed via virtual mappings that are not coherent. Because of
>> their undefined nature, operations like virt_to_page() return garbage
>> when passed virtual addresses obtained from dma_alloc_coherent(). Any
>> subsequent mappings via vmap() of the garbage page values are unusable
>> and result in bad things like bus errors (synchronous aborts in ARM64
>> speak).
>>
>> The MLX4 driver contains code that does the equivalent of:
>>
>> vmap(virt_to_page(dma_alloc_coherent))
>>
>> This results in an OOPs when the device is opened.
>>
>> To fix this...
>>
>> Always use result of dma_alloc_coherent() directly.
> Hi David,
>
> I'm not sure this solution is good enough for the common case(s).
> Typical allocation size will be around 64KB (with default 1K ring size).
> We can't rely on the system to always provide us with that amount of
> contiguous memory.
>
> Current code allocation scheme is more robust, max_direct is typically
> 2 * PAGE_SIZE,
> so pages from order 1 are far more available then higher order.
>
> I need to check why the code is written as it is today, and not as in
> this RFC (which is much more trivial).
> I'll continue to investigate tomorrow, will get back with some answers.
>
> Ido
Acked-by: Ido Shamay <idos@...lanox.com>
Thanks David, this is good for us
>> Remove 'max_direct' parameter to mlx4_buf_alloc(), as it is unused,
>> and adjust all callers.
>>
>> Remove mlx4_en_map_buffer() and mlx4_en_unmap_buffer() as they now do
>> nothing, and adjust all callers.
>>
>> Remove 'page_list' element from struct mlx4_buf as it is unused.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: David Daney <david.daney@...ium.com>
--
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