[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <d20a3c39-dea7-e324-e677-ec416c16559c@rock-chips.com>
Date: Tue, 27 Nov 2018 08:43:11 +0800
From: Shawn Lin <shawn.lin@...k-chips.com>
To: Robin Murphy <robin.murphy@....com>,
JABLONSKY Jan <Jan.JABLONSKY@...lesgroup.com>,
Jaehoon Chung <jh80.chung@...sung.com>
Cc: shawn.lin@...k-chips.com, Ulf Hansson <ulf.hansson@...aro.org>,
"linux-mmc@...r.kernel.org" <linux-mmc@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: dw_mmc: IDMAC Invalidate cache after read
On 2018/11/23 23:29, Robin Murphy wrote:
> Hi Jan,
>
> [repeating some of the discussion from your other thread for the benefit
> of the MMC audience]
>
> On 21/11/2018 07:42, JABLONSKY Jan wrote:
>> CPU may not see most up-to-date and correct copy of DMA buffer, when
>> internal DMA controller is in use.
>> Problem appears on The Altera SoC FPGA (uses integrated DMA controller),
>> during higher CPU and system memory load
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Jan Jablonsky <jan.jablonsky@...lesgroup.com>
>> ---
>> drivers/mmc/host/dw_mmc.c | 3 +--
>> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 2 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/mmc/host/dw_mmc.c b/drivers/mmc/host/dw_mmc.c
>> index 80dc2fd..63873d9 100644
>> --- a/drivers/mmc/host/dw_mmc.c
>> +++ b/drivers/mmc/host/dw_mmc.c
>> @@ -499,8 +499,7 @@ static void dw_mci_dmac_complete_dma(void *arg)
>> dev_vdbg(host->dev, "DMA complete\n");
>> - if ((host->use_dma == TRANS_MODE_EDMAC) &&
>> - data && (data->flags & MMC_DATA_READ))
>> + if (data && (data->flags & MMC_DATA_READ))
>> /* Invalidate cache after read */
>> dma_sync_sg_for_cpu(mmc_dev(host->slot->mmc),
>> data->sg,
>
> It looks very dubious whether this is actually the right thing to do.
> Just considering this driver, edma has an complementary sync_sg call in
> its .start method, so if idma needed this one, logically shouldn't it
> also need the other one as well?
>
> However, from a DMA API point of view, these syncs make no sense either
> way - the very next thing we do here is call host->dma_ops->cleanup(),
> which calls dma_unmap_sg(), which will perform the appropriate cache
> maintenance anyway. Thus I can't see why this code is even here to begin
> with. Similarly on the request path - the sg list really shouldn't have
> been touched since being mapped in dw_mci_pre_dma_transfer(), so that
> sync should also be an effective no-op unless it's papering over some
> race condition elsewhere.
>
> Shawn - do you remember why these syncs were added in 3fc7eaef44dbc?
> Were you seeing actual coherency issues on RK31xx SoCs, or was it
> perhaps just some leftover or misunderstanding which missed getting
> cleaned up?
I can't remember too much details but looking at the dma-mapping code
again, it seems the complemetary sync-op here is useless.
>
> Robin.
>
>
>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists