[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <29733b0931d9dd6a2f0b6919067c7efe@mailhost.ics.forth.gr>
Date: Sun, 06 Jun 2021 21:14:28 +0300
From: Nick Kossifidis <mick@....forth.gr>
To: Guo Ren <guoren@...nel.org>
Cc: Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>,
Drew Fustini <drew@...gleboard.org>,
Anup Patel <anup.patel@....com>,
Palmer Dabbelt <palmerdabbelt@...gle.com>, wefu@...hat.com,
lazyparser@...il.com,
linux-riscv <linux-riscv@...ts.infradead.org>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
linux-arch <linux-arch@...r.kernel.org>,
linux-sunxi@...ts.linux.dev, Guo Ren <guoren@...ux.alibaba.com>,
Paul Walmsley <paul.walmsley@...ive.com>,
Nick Kossifidis <mick@....forth.gr>,
Benjamin Koch <snowball@...b.de>,
Matteo Croce <mcroce@...ux.microsoft.com>,
Wei Fu <tekkamanninja@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC 0/3] riscv: Add DMA_COHERENT support
Στις 2021-05-20 04:45, Guo Ren έγραψε:
> On Wed, May 19, 2021 at 2:53 PM Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de> wrote:
>>
>> On Tue, May 18, 2021 at 11:44:35PM -0700, Drew Fustini wrote:
>> > This patch series looks like it might be useful for the StarFive JH7100
>> > [1] [2] too as it has peripherals on a non-coherent interconnect. GMAC,
>> > USB and SDIO require that the L2 cache must be manually flushed after
>> > DMA operations if the data is intended to be shared with U74 cores [2].
>>
>> Not too much, given that the SiFive lineage CPUs have an uncached
>> window, that is a totally different way to allocate uncached memory.
> It's a very big MIPS smell. What's the attribute of the uncached
> window? (uncached + strong-order/ uncached + weak, most vendors still
> use AXI interconnect, how to deal with a bufferable attribute?) In
> fact, customers' drivers use different ways to deal with DMA memory in
> non-coherent SOC. Most riscv SOC vendors are from ARM, so giving them
> the same way in DMA memory is a smart choice. So using PTE attributes
> is more suitable.
>
> See:
> https://github.com/riscv/virtual-memory/blob/main/specs/611-virtual-memory-diff.pdf
> 4.4.1
> The draft supports custom attribute bits in PTE.
>
Not only it doesn't support custom attributes on PTEs:
"Bits63–54 are reserved for future standard use and must be zeroed by
software for forward compatibility."
It also goes further to say that:
"if any of these bits are set, a page-fault exception is raised"
Powered by blists - more mailing lists