[RFC PATCH v4 0/5] ARM: Fix dma_alloc_coherent() and friends for NOMMU
Robin Murphy
robin.murphy at arm.com
Thu Jan 12 10:07:26 PST 2017
On 12/01/17 17:15, Vladimir Murzin wrote:
> On 12/01/17 17:04, Robin Murphy wrote:
>> On 12/01/17 16:52, Vladimir Murzin wrote:
>>> On 12/01/17 10:55, Benjamin Gaignard wrote:
>>>> 2017-01-12 11:35 GMT+01:00 Benjamin Gaignard <benjamin.gaignard at linaro.org>:
>>>>> 2017-01-11 15:34 GMT+01:00 Vladimir Murzin <vladimir.murzin at arm.com>:
>>>>>> On 11/01/17 13:17, Benjamin Gaignard wrote:
>>>>>>> 2017-01-10 15:18 GMT+01:00 Vladimir Murzin <vladimir.murzin at arm.com>:
>>>>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> It seem that addition of cache support for M-class cpus uncovered
>>>>>>>> latent bug in DMA usage. NOMMU memory model has been treated as being
>>>>>>>> always consistent; however, for R/M classes of cpu memory can be
>>>>>>>> covered by MPU which in turn might configure RAM as Normal
>>>>>>>> i.e. bufferable and cacheable. It breaks dma_alloc_coherent() and
>>>>>>>> friends, since data can stuck in caches now or be buffered.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> This patch set is trying to address the issue by providing region of
>>>>>>>> memory suitable for consistent DMA operations. It is supposed that
>>>>>>>> such region is marked by MPU as non-cacheable. Robin suggested to
>>>>>>>> advertise such memory as reserved shared-dma-pool, rather then using
>>>>>>>> homebrew command line option, and extend dma-coherent to provide
>>>>>>>> default DMA area in the similar way as it is done for CMA (PATCH
>>>>>>>> 2/5). It allows us to offload all bookkeeping on generic coherent DMA
>>>>>>>> framework, and it is seems that it might be reused by other
>>>>>>>> architectures like c6x and blackfin.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Dedicated DMA region is required for cases other than:
>>>>>>>> - MMU/MPU is off
>>>>>>>> - cpu is v7m w/o cache support
>>>>>>>> - device is coherent
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> In case one of the above conditions is true dma operations are forced
>>>>>>>> to be coherent and wired with dma_noop_ops.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> To make life easier NOMMU dma operations are kept in separate
>>>>>>>> compilation unit.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Since the issue was reported in the same time as Benjamin sent his
>>>>>>>> patch [1] to allow mmap for NOMMU, his case is also addressed in this
>>>>>>>> series (PATCH 1/5 and PATCH 3/5).
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Thanks!
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I have tested this v4 on my setup (stm32f4, no cache, no MPU) and unfortunately
>>>>>>> it doesn't work with my drm/kms driver.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I guess the same is for fbmem, but would be better to have confirmation since
>>>>>> amba-clcd I use has not been ported to drm/kms (yet), so I can't test.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I haven't any errors but nothing is displayed unlike what I have when
>>>>>>> using current dma-mapping
>>>>>>> code.
>>>>>>> I guess the issue is coming from dma-noop where __get_free_pages() is
>>>>>>> used instead of alloc_pages()
>>>>>>> in dma-mapping.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Unless I've missed something bellow is a call stack for both
>>>>>>
>>>>>> #1
>>>>>> __alloc_simple_buffer
>>>>>> __dma_alloc_buffer
>>>>>> alloc_pages
>>>>>> split_page
>>>>>> __dma_clear_buffer
>>>>>> memset
>>>>>> page_address
>>>>>>
>>>>>> #2
>>>>>> __get_free_pages
>>>>>> alloc_pages
>>>>>> page_address
>>>>>>
>>>>>> So the difference is that nommu case in dma-mapping.c memzeros memory, handles
>>>>>> DMA_ATTR_NO_KERNEL_MAPPING and does optimisation of memory usage.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Is something from above critical for your driver?
>>>>>
>>>>> I have removed all the diff (split_page, __dma_clear_buffer, memset)
>>>>> from #1 and it is still working.
>>>>> DMA_ATTR_NO_KERNEL_MAPPING flag is not set when allocating the buffer.
>>>>>
>>>>> I have investigated more and found that dma-noop doesn't take care of
>>>>> "dma-ranges" property which is set in DT.
>>>>> I believed that is the root cause of my problem with your patches.
>>>>
>>>> After testing changing virt_to_phys to virt_to_dma in dma-noop.c fix the issue
>>>> modetest and fbdemo are now still functional.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Thanks for narrowing it down! I did not noticed that stm32f4 remap its memory,
>>> so dma-ranges property is in use.
>>>
>>> It looks like virt_to_dma is ARM specific, so I probably have to discard idea
>>> of reusing dma-noop-ops and switch logic into dma-mapping-nommu.c based on
>>> is_device_dma_coherent(dev) check.
>>
>> dma_pfn_offset is a member of struct device, so it should be OK for
>> dma_noop_ops to also make reference to it (and assume it's zero if not
>> explicitly set).
>>
>>> Meanwhile, I'm quite puzzled on how such memory remaping should work together
>>> with reserved memory. It seem it doesn't account dma-ranges while reserving
>>> memory (it is too early) nor while allocating/mapping/etc.
>>
>> The reserved memory is described in terms of CPU physical addresses, so
>> a device offset shouldn't matter from that perspective. It only comes
>> into play at the point you generate the dma_addr_t to hand off to the
>> device - only then do you need to transform the CPU physical address of
>> the allocated/mapped page into the device's view of that page (i.e.
>> subtract the offset).
>
> Thanks for explanation! So dma-coherent.c should be modified, right? I see
> that some architectures provide phys_to_dma/dma_to_phys helpers primary for
> swiotlb, is it safe to reuse them given that default implementation is
> provided? Nothing under Documentation explains how they supposed to be used,
> sorry if asking stupid question.
Those are essentially SWIOTLB-specific, so can't be universally relied
upon. I think something like this ought to suffice:
---8<---
diff --git a/lib/dma-noop.c b/lib/dma-noop.c
index 3d766e78fbe2..fbb1b37750d5 100644
--- a/lib/dma-noop.c
+++ b/lib/dma-noop.c
@@ -8,6 +8,11 @@
#include <linux/dma-mapping.h>
#include <linux/scatterlist.h>
+static dma_addr_t dma_noop_dev_offset(struct device *dev)
+{
+ return (dma_addr_t)dev->dma_pfn_offset << PAGE_SHIFT;
+}
+
static void *dma_noop_alloc(struct device *dev, size_t size,
dma_addr_t *dma_handle, gfp_t gfp,
unsigned long attrs)
@@ -16,7 +21,7 @@ static void *dma_noop_alloc(struct device *dev, size_t
size,
ret = (void *)__get_free_pages(gfp, get_order(size));
if (ret)
- *dma_handle = virt_to_phys(ret);
+ *dma_handle = virt_to_phys(ret) - dma_noop_dev_offset(dev);
return ret;
}
@@ -32,7 +37,7 @@ static dma_addr_t dma_noop_map_page(struct device
*dev, struct page *page,
enum dma_data_direction dir,
unsigned long attrs)
{
- return page_to_phys(page) + offset;
+ return page_to_phys(page) + offset - dma_noop_dev_offset(dev);
}
static int dma_noop_map_sg(struct device *dev, struct scatterlist *sgl,
int nents,
@@ -47,7 +52,8 @@ static int dma_noop_map_sg(struct device *dev, struct
scatterlist *sgl, int nent
BUG_ON(!sg_page(sg));
va = sg_virt(sg);
- sg_dma_address(sg) = (dma_addr_t)virt_to_phys(va);
+ sg_dma_address(sg) = (dma_addr_t)virt_to_phys(va) -
+ dma_noop_dev_offset(dev);
sg_dma_len(sg) = sg->length;
}
--->8---
intentionally whitespace-damaged by copy-pasting off my terminal to
emphasise how utterly untested it is ;)
Robin.
More information about the linux-arm-kernel
mailing list