[PATCH v2 3/5] spi: spi-mtk-nor: use dma_alloc_coherent() for bounce buffer
Ikjoon Jang
ikjn at chromium.org
Mon Sep 21 02:52:16 EDT 2020
On Fri, Sep 18, 2020 at 9:25 PM Chuanhong Guo <gch981213 at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Hi!
>
> On Fri, Sep 18, 2020 at 4:35 PM Ikjoon Jang <ikjn at chromium.org> wrote:
> >
> > Use dma_alloc_coherent() for bounce buffer instead of kmalloc.
>
> The commit message should explain why such a change is
> needed. (i.e. why using dma_alloc_coherent here is better
> than kmalloc.) And if there's no benefit for this change I'd prefer
> leaving it untouched.
> I remembered reading somewhere that stream DMA api is
> prefered over dma_alloc_coherent for this kind of single-direction
> DMA operation.
>
I will add more description on why I changed it to dma_alloc_coherent():
- to explictly support devices like mt8173-nor which only supports
32bit addressing for dma.
And it also reminded me an another problem, (I won't address this
issue for now in v3):
as this device is using dma range as [start, end) format
where 'end' can be zero in that corner case of {start = 0xffff_f000; end = 0; }
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Ikjoon Jang <ikjn at chromium.org>
> >
> > ---
> >
> > (no changes since v1)
> >
> > drivers/spi/spi-mtk-nor.c | 60 +++++++++++++++++++++++----------------
> > 1 file changed, 35 insertions(+), 25 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/spi/spi-mtk-nor.c b/drivers/spi/spi-mtk-nor.c
> > index 54b2c0fde95b..e14798a6e7d0 100644
> > --- a/drivers/spi/spi-mtk-nor.c
> > +++ b/drivers/spi/spi-mtk-nor.c
> > @@ -96,6 +96,7 @@ struct mtk_nor {
> > struct device *dev;
> > void __iomem *base;
> > u8 *buffer;
> > + dma_addr_t buffer_dma;
> > struct clk *spi_clk;
> > struct clk *ctlr_clk;
> > unsigned int spi_freq;
> > @@ -275,19 +276,16 @@ static void mtk_nor_setup_bus(struct mtk_nor *sp, const struct spi_mem_op *op)
> > mtk_nor_rmw(sp, MTK_NOR_REG_BUSCFG, reg, MTK_NOR_BUS_MODE_MASK);
> > }
> >
> > -static int mtk_nor_read_dma(struct mtk_nor *sp, u32 from, unsigned int length,
> > - u8 *buffer)
> > +static int read_dma(struct mtk_nor *sp, u32 from, unsigned int length,
>
> This name is a bit confusing considering there's a mtk_nor_read_dma
> below.
> As this function now only executes dma readings and wait it to finish,
> what about mtk_nor_dma_exec instead?
yeah, good idea.
>
> > + dma_addr_t dma_addr)
> > {
> > int ret = 0;
> > ulong delay;
> > u32 reg;
> > - dma_addr_t dma_addr;
> >
> > - dma_addr = dma_map_single(sp->dev, buffer, length, DMA_FROM_DEVICE);
> > - if (dma_mapping_error(sp->dev, dma_addr)) {
> > - dev_err(sp->dev, "failed to map dma buffer.\n");
> > + if (WARN_ON((length & MTK_NOR_DMA_ALIGN_MASK) ||
> > + (dma_addr & MTK_NOR_DMA_ALIGN_MASK)))
>
> These alignment is guaranteed by callers of this function if all
> my comments below are addressed. This check isn't needed.
ACK.
>
> > return -EINVAL;
> > - }
> >
> > writel(from, sp->base + MTK_NOR_REG_DMA_FADR);
> > writel(dma_addr, sp->base + MTK_NOR_REG_DMA_DADR);
> > @@ -312,30 +310,39 @@ static int mtk_nor_read_dma(struct mtk_nor *sp, u32 from, unsigned int length,
> > (delay + 1) * 100);
> > }
> >
> > - dma_unmap_single(sp->dev, dma_addr, length, DMA_FROM_DEVICE);
> > if (ret < 0)
> > dev_err(sp->dev, "dma read timeout.\n");
> >
> > return ret;
> > }
> >
> > -static int mtk_nor_read_bounce(struct mtk_nor *sp, u32 from,
> > - unsigned int length, u8 *buffer)
> > +static int mtk_nor_read_dma(struct mtk_nor *sp, u32 from,
> > + unsigned int length, u8 *buffer)
> > {
> > - unsigned int rdlen;
> > int ret;
> > + dma_addr_t dma_addr;
> > + bool bounce = need_bounce(buffer, length);
> >
> > - if (length & MTK_NOR_DMA_ALIGN_MASK)
> > - rdlen = (length + MTK_NOR_DMA_ALIGN) & ~MTK_NOR_DMA_ALIGN_MASK;
>
> The intention of this rdlen alignment is explained in 2/5.
> Please make sure this rdlen alignment logic is present
> only for PIO reading.
okay, I'll use padding again in v3.
>
> > - else
> > - rdlen = length;
> > + if (!bounce) {
> > + dma_addr = dma_map_single(sp->dev, buffer, length,
> > + DMA_FROM_DEVICE);
> > + if (dma_mapping_error(sp->dev, dma_addr)) {
> > + dev_err(sp->dev, "failed to map dma buffer.\n");
> > + return -EINVAL;
> > + }
> > + } else {
> > + dma_addr = sp->buffer_dma;
> > + }
> >
> > - ret = mtk_nor_read_dma(sp, from, rdlen, sp->buffer);
> > - if (ret)
> > - return ret;
> > + ret = read_dma(sp, from, length, dma_addr);
> >
> > - memcpy(buffer, sp->buffer, length);
> > - return 0;
> > + if (!bounce)
> > + dma_unmap_single(sp->dev, dma_addr, length,
> > + DMA_FROM_DEVICE);
> > + else
> > + memcpy(buffer, sp->buffer, length);
> > +
> > + return ret;
> > }
>
> I think a separated read_dma and read_bounce function will be
> cleaner than this if-else implementation:
> read_dma:
> 1. call dma_map_single to get physical address
> 2. call read_dma to execute operation
> 3. call dma_unmap_single
>
> read_bounce:
> 1. align reading length
> 2. call read_dma
> 3. call memcpy
ACK
>
> >
> > static int mtk_nor_read_pio(struct mtk_nor *sp, const struct spi_mem_op *op)
> > @@ -439,11 +446,6 @@ static int mtk_nor_exec_op(struct spi_mem *mem, const struct spi_mem_op *op)
> > if (op->data.nbytes == 1) {
> > mtk_nor_set_addr(sp, op);
> > return mtk_nor_read_pio(sp, op);
> > - } else if (((ulong)(op->data.buf.in) &
> > - MTK_NOR_DMA_ALIGN_MASK)) {
> > - return mtk_nor_read_bounce(sp, op->addr.val,
> > - op->data.nbytes,
> > - op->data.buf.in);
> > } else {
> > return mtk_nor_read_dma(sp, op->addr.val,
> > op->data.nbytes,
> > @@ -654,6 +656,10 @@ static int mtk_nor_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
> > sp->dev = &pdev->dev;
> > sp->spi_clk = spi_clk;
> > sp->ctlr_clk = ctlr_clk;
>
> There is extra memory allocation code for sp->buffer in mtk_nor_probe.
> If you intend to replace this with dma_alloc_coherent you should
> drop those devm_kmalloc code as well.
>
> > + sp->buffer = dma_alloc_coherent(&pdev->dev, MTK_NOR_BOUNCE_BUF_SIZE,
> > + &sp->buffer_dma, GFP_KERNEL);
>
> There's a devm variant: dmam_alloc_coherent(dev, size, dma_handle, gfp)
ACK
>
> > + if (!sp->buffer)
> > + return -ENOMEM;
>
> This spi-nor controller requires all addresses to be 16-byte aligned.
> Although it should be guaranteed by a usually way larger page
> alignment address from dma_alloc_coherent I'd prefer an explicit
> check for address alignment here rather than letting it probe
> successfully and fail for every dma_read with bounce buffer.
>
Yep, I'll restore the padding.
>
> >
> > irq = platform_get_irq_optional(pdev, 0);
> > if (irq < 0) {
> > @@ -674,6 +680,8 @@ static int mtk_nor_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
> > ret = mtk_nor_init(sp);
> > if (ret < 0) {
> > kfree(ctlr);
> > + dma_free_coherent(&pdev->dev, MTK_NOR_BOUNCE_BUF_SIZE,
> > + sp->buffer, sp->buffer_dma);
> > return ret;
> > }
> >
> > @@ -692,6 +700,8 @@ static int mtk_nor_remove(struct platform_device *pdev)
> >
> > mtk_nor_disable_clk(sp);
> >
> > + dma_free_coherent(&pdev->dev, MTK_NOR_BOUNCE_BUF_SIZE,
> > + sp->buffer, sp->buffer_dma);
> > return 0;
> > }
> >
> > --
> > 2.28.0.681.g6f77f65b4e-goog
> >
>
>
> --
> Regards,
> Chuanhong Guo
More information about the linux-arm-kernel
mailing list