Date:	Thu, 22 Jan 2015 11:01:21 -0800
From:	Dean Gehnert <deang@....com>
To:	Ezequiel Garcia <ezequiel.garcia@...e-electrons.com>,
	Russell King - ARM Linux <linux@....linux.org.uk>
CC:	netdev@...r.kernel.org, David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>,
	B38611@...escale.com, fabio.estevam@...escale.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH net 0/2] net: marvell: Fix highmem support on non-TSO
 path

On 01/22/2015 10:45 AM, Ezequiel Garcia wrote:
> On 01/22/2015 03:41 PM, Dean Gehnert wrote:
>> On 01/21/2015 07:01 AM, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote:
>>> On Wed, Jan 21, 2015 at 09:54:08AM -0300, Ezequiel Garcia wrote:
>>>> These two commits are fixes to the issue reported by Russell King on
>>>> mv643xx_eth. Namely, the introduction of a regression by commit
>>>> 69ad0dd7af22
>>>> which removed the support for highmem skb fragments. The guilty commit
>>>> introduced the assumption of fragment's payload being located in
>>>> lowmem pages.
>>> I do wonder whether 69ad0dd7af22 is the real culpret, or whether there is
>>> some other change in the netdev layer that we're missing.  That commit is
>>> in 3.16, but from what I remember, 3.17 works fine, it's 3.18 which
>>> fails.
>>>
>>>> A similar pattern can be found in the original mvneta driver (in
>>>> fact, the
>>>> regression was introduced by copy-pasting the mvneta code).
>>>>
>>>> These fixes are for the non-TSO egress path in mvneta and mv643xx_eth
>>>> drivers.
>>>> The TSO path needs a more intrusive change, as the TSO API needs to
>>>> be fixed
>>>> (e.g. to make it work in skb fragments, instead of pointers to data).
>>>>
>>>> Russell, as I'm still unable to reproduce this, do you think you can
>>>> give it a spin over there?
>>> Sure - I think the only one I can test is mv643xx_eth, I don't think I
>>> have any device which supports mv_neta.
>>>
>>> The test scenario is for a NFS mount (the Marvell device as the NFS
>>> client) over IPv6.
>>>
>>> Initial testing looks good, I'll let it run for a while with various
>>> builds on the NFS share (which iirc was one of the triggering
>>> workloads).
>>>
>>> Thanks.
>>>
>> FYI, I found a way to reproduce the mv643xx_eth transmit corruption
>> without using a network filesystem by using SOCAT (should also be able
>> to use NETCAT or NC) and I have a bit more information about the
>> corruption that looks like it is somehow related to the cache line size.
>>
>> 1) Create a "large" input file with known data on the target (saved to
>> RAM disk or other storage):
>>      % php -r 'for ($x = 0; $x < 0x2000000; $x++) { printf("%08X\n", $x);
>> }' > ExpectData.in
>>        or
>>      % perl -e 'for ($x = 0; $x < 0x2000000; $x++) { printf("%08X\n",
>> $x); }' > ExpectData.in
>>      % md5sum ExpectData.in
>>      4a4727232209b85badc1ca25ed4df222  ExpectData.in
>> 2) Start SOCAT on the host system to perform Ethernet receive MD5
>> checksum of the data:
>>      % socat -s -u TCP4-LISTEN:4000,fork,reuseaddr EXEC:md5sum
>> 3) Enable TSO on the target:
>>      % ethtool -K eth0 tso on
>> 4)  Send the data file from the target to the host using SOCAT with a
>> non-cache aligned block size:
>>      % socat -b$(((1024*10)+1)) -u ExpectData.in TCP:192.168.1.212:4000
>> 5) The SOCAT running on the host system will report the MD5 checksum. If
>> the MD5 is correct, it should be 4a4727232209b85badc1ca25ed4df222.
>>
>> What I am seeing is every now and then, there are 32-bits (4 bytes) of
>> data in the transmit Ethernet stream that are corrupted. If I change the
>> SOCAT block size to something that is Armada 300 (Kirkwood) cache line
>> aligned (ie. -b$(((1024*10)+0)) or -b$(((1024*10)+8))), it works just
>> fine... If you want to capture the actual file and look at it, you can
>> use SOCAT:
>>    % socat -u TCP4-LISTEN:4000,fork,reuseaddr OPEN:ActualData.in,creat
>> and since the data file is text, it is really easy to see the corruption
>> (diff ExpectData.in ActualData.in | less).
>>
>> I can disable TSO (ethtool -K eth0 tso off) and re-run the tests and the
>> corruption does not occur.
>>
>> I will give Ezequiel's latest patches a test a today and let you know if
>> they change the behavior.
>>
> Sigh, this smells like a completely different bug. Which kernel version
> are you testing?
This was tested on v3.16.7 with all the patches forward to tip of tree 
on the mv643xx_eth driver. We are still not devtree enabled, so v3.16.7 
is where we are stuck until I get the Armada XP and MV-EBU enabled.

BTW, I did check and I already have all the latest NetDev patches for 
the driver and the problem still occurs...

It is almost feeling like a low-level DMA issue being the root cause... 
A bit off topic for the NetDev discussion, but we have also seen some 
odd behavior with the Firewire OHCI driver in respect to the Kirkwood 
platform and DMA... Not sure if they are could be related problems or not.

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

Powered by blists - more mailing lists