linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] mtd: nand: raw: atmel: add module param to avoid using 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: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

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

Date:   Mon, 4 Jun 2018 18:03:31 +0200
From:   Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon@...tlin.com>
To:     Tudor Ambarus <tudor.ambarus@...rochip.com>
Cc:     Peter Rosin <peda@...ntia.se>,
        Nicolas Ferre <nicolas.ferre@...rochip.com>,
        Ludovic Desroches <ludovic.desroches@...rochip.com>,
        Alexandre Belloni <alexandre.belloni@...tlin.com>,
        Marek Vasut <marek.vasut@...il.com>,
        Josh Wu <rainyfeeling@...look.com>,
        Cyrille Pitchen <cyrille.pitchen@...ev4u.fr>,
        <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, <linux-mtd@...ts.infradead.org>,
        Richard Weinberger <richard@....at>,
        Brian Norris <computersforpeace@...il.com>,
        David Woodhouse <dwmw2@...radead.org>,
        <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] mtd: nand: raw: atmel: add module param to avoid using
 dma

On Mon, 4 Jun 2018 18:46:56 +0300
Tudor Ambarus <tudor.ambarus@...rochip.com> wrote:

> Hi, Peter,
> 
> On 05/28/2018 01:10 PM, Peter Rosin wrote:
> 
> [cut]
> 
> > So, I think I want either
> > 
> > A) the NAND controller to use master 1 DMAC0/IF0 (i.e. slave 8 DDR2 port 2) and
> >     the LCDC to use master 9 (i.e. slave 9 DDR2 Port 3)
> > 
> > or
> > 
> > B) the NAND controller to use master 2 DMAC0/IF1 (i.e. slave 7 DDR2 port 1, and
> >     possibly slave 9 DDR2 port 3 (if my previous findings are relevant) and the
> >     LCDC to use master 8 (i.e. slave 8 DDR2 Port 2)  
> 
> My understanding is that "Table 14-3. Master to Slave Access" describes
> what connections are allowed between the masters and slaves, while the
> PRxSy registers just set the priorities. What happens when you assign
> the highest priority to a master to slave connection that is not
> allowed? Probably it is ignored, but I'll check with the hardware team.
> So I expect that the NAND controller can not use DDR2 port 3 regardless
> of the priority set.
> 
> [cut]
> 
> > So, output is as expected and I believe that the patch makes the NAND DMA
> > accesses use master 2 DMAC0/IF1 and are thus forced to use slave 7 DDR2 Port 1
> > (and possibly 9). The LCDC is using slave 8 DDR2 Port 2. So there should be no
> > slave conflict?
> > 
> > But the on-screen crap remains during NAND accesses.  
> 
> No conflict, but you missed to dispatch the load on the LCDC DMA
> masters, if I understood correctly.
> 
> So, I think we want to test the following:
> - NAND controller to use DMAC0/IF1 (slave 7 DDR2 port 1)

As I explained in one of my previous email, it's not that easy to set
up, because the SRAM is connected to IF0, and we're using DMA memcpy
here. Also, I don't see how it could solve Peter's problem if, even
when he switches to LCDC master 9 for the primary overlay, he still
keeps experiencing FIFO underruns.

> - LCDC to use master 8 (slave 8 DDR2 Port 2) and master 9 (slave 9 DDR2
> Port 3).

Except that only works if you have several overlays activated, which
AFAIR, is not the case in Peter's setup.