[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <0baff803-b0ea-529f-095a-897398b4f63f@arm.com>
Date: Thu, 24 Mar 2022 11:30:38 +0000
From: Robin Murphy <robin.murphy@....com>
To: Serge Semin <Sergey.Semin@...kalelectronics.ru>,
Gustavo Pimentel <gustavo.pimentel@...opsys.com>,
Vinod Koul <vkoul@...nel.org>,
Jingoo Han <jingoohan1@...il.com>,
Bjorn Helgaas <bhelgaas@...gle.com>,
Frank Li <Frank.Li@....com>,
Manivannan Sadhasivam <manivannan.sadhasivam@...aro.org>,
Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>,
Marek Szyprowski <m.szyprowski@...sung.com>,
Vladimir Murzin <vladimir.murzin@....com>
Cc: Serge Semin <fancer.lancer@...il.com>,
Alexey Malahov <Alexey.Malahov@...kalelectronics.ru>,
Pavel Parkhomenko <Pavel.Parkhomenko@...kalelectronics.ru>,
Lorenzo Pieralisi <lorenzo.pieralisi@....com>,
Rob Herring <robh@...nel.org>,
Krzysztof WilczyĆski <kw@...ux.com>,
linux-pci@...r.kernel.org, dmaengine@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, iommu@...ts.linux-foundation.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 03/25] dma-direct: take dma-ranges/offsets into account in
resource mapping
On 2022-03-24 01:48, Serge Semin wrote:
> A basic device-specific linear memory mapping was introduced back in
> commit ("dma: Take into account dma_pfn_offset") as a single-valued offset
> preserved in the device.dma_pfn_offset field, which was initialized for
> instance by means of the "dma-ranges" DT property. Afterwards the
> functionality was extended to support more than one device-specific region
> defined in the device.dma_range_map list of maps. But all of these
> improvements concerned a single pointer, page or sg DMA-mapping methods,
> while the system resource mapping function turned to miss the
> corresponding modification. Thus the dma_direct_map_resource() method now
> just casts the CPU physical address to the device DMA address with no
> dma-ranges-based mapping taking into account, which is obviously wrong.
> Let's fix it by using the phys_to_dma_direct() method to get the
> device-specific bus address from the passed memory resource for the case
> of the directly mapped DMA.
It may not have been well-documented at the time, but this was largely
intentional. The assumption based on known systems was that where
dma_pfn_offset existed, it would *not* apply to peer MMIO addresses.
For instance, DTs for TI Keystone 2 platforms only describe an offset
for RAM:
dma-ranges = <0x80000000 0x8 0x00000000 0x80000000>;
but a DMA controller might also want to access something in the MMIO
range 0x0-0x7fffffff, of which it still has an identical non-offset
view. If a driver was previously using dma_map_resource() for that, it
would now start getting DMA_MAPPING_ERROR because the dma_range_map
exists but doesn't describe the MMIO region. I agree that in hindsight
it's not an ideal situation, but it's how things have ended up, so at
this point I'm wary of making potentially-breaking changes.
May I ask what exactly your setup looks like, if you have a DMA
controller with an offset view of its "own" MMIO space?
Thanks,
Robin.
> Fixes: 25f1e1887088 ("dma: Take into account dma_pfn_offset")
> Signed-off-by: Serge Semin <Sergey.Semin@...kalelectronics.ru>
> ---
> kernel/dma/direct.c | 2 +-
> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/kernel/dma/direct.c b/kernel/dma/direct.c
> index 50f48e9e4598..9ce8192b29ab 100644
> --- a/kernel/dma/direct.c
> +++ b/kernel/dma/direct.c
> @@ -497,7 +497,7 @@ int dma_direct_map_sg(struct device *dev, struct scatterlist *sgl, int nents,
> dma_addr_t dma_direct_map_resource(struct device *dev, phys_addr_t paddr,
> size_t size, enum dma_data_direction dir, unsigned long attrs)
> {
> - dma_addr_t dma_addr = paddr;
> + dma_addr_t dma_addr = phys_to_dma_direct(dev, paddr);
>
> if (unlikely(!dma_capable(dev, dma_addr, size, false))) {
> dev_err_once(dev,
Powered by blists - more mailing lists