| 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
| ||
|
Message-ID: <MN2PR12MB3232C36B88F3667D89FFEA929CFC0@MN2PR12MB3232.namprd12.prod.outlook.com>
Date: Wed, 11 Mar 2020 17:44:37 +0000
From: "Nath, Arindam" <Arindam.Nath@....com>
To: Logan Gunthorpe <logang@...tatee.com>,
"Mehta, Sanju" <Sanju.Mehta@....com>,
"jdmason@...zu.us" <jdmason@...zu.us>,
"dave.jiang@...el.com" <dave.jiang@...el.com>,
"allenbh@...il.com" <allenbh@...il.com>,
"S-k, Shyam-sundar" <Shyam-sundar.S-k@....com>
CC: "linux-ntb@...glegroups.com" <linux-ntb@...glegroups.com>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: RE: [PATCH v2 1/5] ntb_perf: refactor code for CPU and DMA transfers
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Logan Gunthorpe <logang@...tatee.com>
> Sent: Wednesday, March 11, 2020 02:51
> To: Mehta, Sanju <Sanju.Mehta@....com>; jdmason@...zu.us;
> dave.jiang@...el.com; allenbh@...il.com; Nath, Arindam
> <Arindam.Nath@....com>; S-k, Shyam-sundar <Shyam-sundar.S-
> k@....com>
> Cc: linux-ntb@...glegroups.com; linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
> Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/5] ntb_perf: refactor code for CPU and DMA
> transfers
>
>
>
> On 2020-03-10 2:54 p.m., Sanjay R Mehta wrote:
> > From: Arindam Nath <arindam.nath@....com>
> >
> > This patch creates separate function to handle CPU
> > and DMA transfers. Since CPU transfers use memcopy
> > and DMA transfers use dmaengine APIs, these changes
> > not only allow logical separation between the two,
> > but also allows someone to clearly see the difference
> > in the way the two are handled.
> >
> > In the case of DMA, we DMA from system memory to the
> > memory window(MW) of NTB, which is a MMIO region, we
> > should not use dma_map_page() for mapping MW. The
> > correct way to map a MMIO region is to use
> > dma_map_resource(), so the code is modified
> > accordingly.
> >
> > dma_map_resource() expects physical address of the
> > region to be mapped for DMA, we add a new field,
> > outbuf_phys_addr, to struct perf_peer, and also
> > another field, outbuf_dma_addr, to store the
> > corresponding mapped address returned by the API.
> >
> > Since the MW is contiguous, rather than mapping
> > chunk-by-chunk, we map the entire MW before the
> > actual DMA transfer happens. Then for each chunk,
> > we simply pass offset into the mapped region and
> > DMA to that region. Then later, we unmap the MW
> > during perf_clear_test().
> >
> > The above means that now we need to have different
> > function parameters to deal with in the case of
> > CPU and DMA transfers. In the case of CPU transfers,
> > we simply need the CPU virtual addresses for memcopy,
> > but in the case of DMA, we need dma_addr_t, which
> > will be different from CPU physical address depending
> > on whether IOMMU is enabled or not. Thus we now
> > have two separate functions, perf_copy_chunk_cpu(),
> > and perf_copy_chunk_dma() to take care of above
> > consideration.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Arindam Nath <arindam.nath@....com>
> > Signed-off-by: Sanjay R Mehta <sanju.mehta@....com>
> > ---
> > drivers/ntb/test/ntb_perf.c | 141
> +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-----------
> > 1 file changed, 105 insertions(+), 36 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/ntb/test/ntb_perf.c b/drivers/ntb/test/ntb_perf.c
> > index e9b7c2d..6d16628 100644
> > --- a/drivers/ntb/test/ntb_perf.c
> > +++ b/drivers/ntb/test/ntb_perf.c
> > @@ -149,6 +149,8 @@ struct perf_peer {
> > u64 outbuf_xlat;
> > resource_size_t outbuf_size;
> > void __iomem *outbuf;
> > + phys_addr_t outbuf_phys_addr;
> > + dma_addr_t outbuf_dma_addr;
> >
> > /* Inbound MW params */
> > dma_addr_t inbuf_xlat;
> > @@ -775,26 +777,24 @@ static void perf_dma_copy_callback(void *data)
> > wake_up(&pthr->dma_wait);
> > }
> >
> > -static int perf_copy_chunk(struct perf_thread *pthr,
> > - void __iomem *dst, void *src, size_t len)
> > +static int perf_copy_chunk_cpu(struct perf_thread *pthr,
> > + void __iomem *dst, void *src, size_t len)
> > +{
> > + memcpy_toio(dst, src, len);
> > +
> > + return likely(atomic_read(&pthr->perf->tsync) > 0) ? 0 : -EINTR;
> > +}
> > +
> > +static int perf_copy_chunk_dma(struct perf_thread *pthr,
> > + dma_addr_t dst, void *src, size_t len)
> > {
> > struct dma_async_tx_descriptor *tx;
> > struct dmaengine_unmap_data *unmap;
> > struct device *dma_dev;
> > int try = 0, ret = 0;
> >
> > - if (!use_dma) {
> > - memcpy_toio(dst, src, len);
> > - goto ret_check_tsync;
> > - }
> > -
> > dma_dev = pthr->dma_chan->device->dev;
> > -
> > - if (!is_dma_copy_aligned(pthr->dma_chan->device,
> offset_in_page(src),
> > - offset_in_page(dst), len))
> > - return -EIO;
>
> Can you please split this patch into multiple patches? It is hard to
> review and part of the reason this code is such a mess is because we
> merged large patches with a bunch of different changes rolled into one,
> many of which didn't get sufficient reviewer attention.
>
> Patches that refactor things shouldn't be making functional changes
> (like adding dma_map_resources()).
We will split the patch into multiple patches in v2.
>
>
> > -static int perf_run_test(struct perf_thread *pthr)
> > +static int perf_run_test_cpu(struct perf_thread *pthr)
> > {
> > struct perf_peer *peer = pthr->perf->test_peer;
> > struct perf_ctx *perf = pthr->perf;
> > @@ -914,7 +903,7 @@ static int perf_run_test(struct perf_thread *pthr)
> >
> > /* Copied field is cleared on test launch stage */
> > while (pthr->copied < total_size) {
> > - ret = perf_copy_chunk(pthr, flt_dst, flt_src, chunk_size);
> > + ret = perf_copy_chunk_cpu(pthr, flt_dst, flt_src,
> chunk_size);
> > if (ret) {
> > dev_err(&perf->ntb->dev, "%d: Got error %d on
> test\n",
> > pthr->tidx, ret);
> > @@ -937,6 +926,74 @@ static int perf_run_test(struct perf_thread *pthr)
> > return 0;
> > }
> >
> > +static int perf_run_test_dma(struct perf_thread *pthr)
> > +{
> > + struct perf_peer *peer = pthr->perf->test_peer;
> > + struct perf_ctx *perf = pthr->perf;
> > + struct device *dma_dev;
> > + dma_addr_t flt_dst, bnd_dst;
> > + u64 total_size, chunk_size;
> > + void *flt_src;
> > + int ret = 0;
> > +
> > + total_size = 1ULL << total_order;
> > + chunk_size = 1ULL << chunk_order;
> > + chunk_size = min_t(u64, peer->outbuf_size, chunk_size);
> > +
> > + /* Map MW for DMA */
> > + dma_dev = pthr->dma_chan->device->dev;
> > + peer->outbuf_dma_addr = dma_map_resource(dma_dev,
> > + peer->outbuf_phys_addr,
> > + peer->outbuf_size,
> > + DMA_FROM_DEVICE, 0);
> > + if (dma_mapping_error(dma_dev, peer->outbuf_dma_addr)) {
> > + dma_unmap_resource(dma_dev, peer->outbuf_dma_addr,
> > + peer->outbuf_size, DMA_FROM_DEVICE,
> 0);
> > + return -EIO;
> > + }
> > +
> > + flt_src = pthr->src;
> > + bnd_dst = peer->outbuf_dma_addr + peer->outbuf_size;
> > + flt_dst = peer->outbuf_dma_addr;
> > +
> > + pthr->duration = ktime_get();
> > + /* Copied field is cleared on test launch stage */
> > + while (pthr->copied < total_size) {
> > + ret = perf_copy_chunk_dma(pthr, flt_dst, flt_src,
> chunk_size);
> > + if (ret) {
> > + dev_err(&perf->ntb->dev, "%d: Got error %d on
> test\n",
> > + pthr->tidx, ret);
> > + return ret;
> > + }
> > +
>
> Honestly, this doesn't seem like a good approach to me. Duplicating the
> majority of the perf_run_test() function is making the code more
> complicated and harder to maintain.
>
> You should be able to just selectively call dma_map_resources() in
> perf_run_test(), or even in perf_setup_peer_mw() without needing to add
> so much extra duplicate code.
Will be taken care of in v2. Thanks for the suggestions.
Arindam
>
> Logan
Powered by blists - more mailing lists