[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <b49180f4-3e1b-d1f3-c6c3-98fbe1e66e4b@arm.com>
Date: Tue, 8 May 2018 11:14:32 +0100
From: Robin Murphy <robin.murphy@....com>
To: Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>
Cc: m.szyprowski@...sung.com, iommu@...ts.linux-foundation.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] dma-debug: Check scatterlist segments
On 25/04/18 06:58, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> This looks interesting. I suspect it is going to blow up in
> quite a few places, so maybe at least for now it might make sense
> to have a separate config option?
True, it's nice to verify this for 'traditional' dma_map_sg() usage, but
places where it's just used as an intermediate shorthand for "prepare
all these pages for arbitrary future DMA" are liable to be noisy with
false-positives for not respecting the default values when they arguably
don't matter. I'll respin this as an additional config under
DMA_API_DEBUG, and then we can debate "default y" or not.
Robin.
> On Tue, Apr 24, 2018 at 05:12:19PM +0100, Robin Murphy wrote:
>> Drivers/subsystems creating scatterlists for DMA should be taking care
>> to respect the scatter-gather limitations of the appropriate device, as
>> described by dma_parms. A DMA API implementation cannot feasibly split
>> a scatterlist into *more* entries than originally passed, so it is not
>> well defined what they should do when given a segment larger than the
>> limit they are also required to respect.
>>
>> Conversely, devices which are less limited than the rather conservative
>> defaults, or indeed have no limitations at all (e.g. GPUs with their own
>> internal MMU), should be encouraged to set appropriate dma_parms, as
>> they may get more efficient DMA mapping performance out of it.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Robin Murphy <robin.murphy@....com>
>> ---
>> lib/dma-debug.c | 26 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>> 1 file changed, 26 insertions(+)
>>
>> diff --git a/lib/dma-debug.c b/lib/dma-debug.c
>> index 7f5cdc1e6b29..9f158941004d 100644
>> --- a/lib/dma-debug.c
>> +++ b/lib/dma-debug.c
>> @@ -1293,6 +1293,30 @@ static void check_sync(struct device *dev,
>> put_hash_bucket(bucket, &flags);
>> }
>>
>> +static void check_sg_segment(struct device *dev, struct scatterlist *sg)
>> +{
>> + unsigned int max_seg = dma_get_max_seg_size(dev);
>> + dma_addr_t start, end, boundary = dma_get_seg_boundary(dev);
>> +
>> + /*
>> + * Either the driver forgot to set dma_parms appropriately, or
>> + * whoever generated the list forgot to check them.
>> + */
>> + if (sg->length > max_seg)
>> + err_printk(dev, NULL, "DMA-API: mapping sg segment longer than device claims to support [len=%u] [max=%u]\n",
>> + sg->length, max_seg);
>> + /*
>> + * In some cases this could potentially be the DMA API
>> + * implementation's fault, but it would usually imply that
>> + * the scatterlist was built inappropriately to begin with.
>> + */
>> + start = sg_dma_address(sg);
>> + end = start + sg_dma_len(sg) - 1;
>> + if ((start ^ end) & ~boundary)
>> + err_printk(dev, NULL, "DMA-API: mapping sg segment across boundary [start=0x%016llx] [end=0x%016llx] [boundary=0x%016llx]\n",
>> + start, end, boundary);
>> +}
>> +
>> void debug_dma_map_page(struct device *dev, struct page *page, size_t offset,
>> size_t size, int direction, dma_addr_t dma_addr,
>> bool map_single)
>> @@ -1423,6 +1447,8 @@ void debug_dma_map_sg(struct device *dev, struct scatterlist *sg,
>> check_for_illegal_area(dev, sg_virt(s), sg_dma_len(s));
>> }
>>
>> + check_sg_segment(dev, s);
>> +
>> add_dma_entry(entry);
>> }
>> }
>> --
>> 2.17.0.dirty
> ---end quoted text---
>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists