[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20241015075418.GA25487@lst.de>
Date: Tue, 15 Oct 2024 09:54:18 +0200
From: Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>
To: Ming Lei <ming.lei@...hat.com>
Cc: Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>, Robin Murphy <robin.murphy@....com>,
Hannes Reinecke <hare@...e.de>,
Hamza Mahfooz <someguy@...ective-light.com>,
Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@...el.com>,
linux-block@...r.kernel.org, io-uring@...r.kernel.org,
linux-raid@...r.kernel.org, iommu@...ts.linux.dev,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [Report] annoyed dma debug warning "cacheline tracking EEXIST,
overlapping mappings aren't supported"
On Tue, Oct 15, 2024 at 03:40:26PM +0800, Ming Lei wrote:
> > Yes, active_cacheline_insert only complains for FROM_DEVICE or
> > BIDIRECTIONAL mappings. I can't see how raid 1 would trigger that
> > given that it only reads from one leg at a time.
> >
> > Ming, can you look a bit more into what is happening here?
>
> All should be READ IO which is FROM_DEVICE, please see my reply:
Yes, reads translate to DMA_FROM_DEVICE.
> https://lore.kernel.org/linux-block/Zw3MZrK_l7DuFfFd@fedora/
>
> And the raid1 warning is actually from raid1_sync_request().
In that case the warnings are perfectly valid because the I/O patterns
will create data corruption on non-coherent architectures. For direct
I/O from userspace the kernel can't prevent it, but for raid1 we should
be able to do something better. As raid1_sync_request is a convoluted
and undocumented mess I don't have a straigh shot answer to what it is
doing (wrong) and how to fix it unfortunately.
>
>
> Thanks,
> Ming
---end quoted text---
Powered by blists - more mailing lists