[RFC PATCH 2/2] mtd: devices: m25p80: Enable spi-nor bounce buffer support

[Cyrille Pitchen]

Le 01/03/2017 à 15:28, Boris Brezillon a écrit :
> On Wed, 1 Mar 2017 15:21:24 +0100
> Cyrille Pitchen <cyrille.pitchen at atmel.com> wrote:
> 
>> + Mark
>>
>> Le 01/03/2017 à 12:46, Vignesh R a écrit :
>>>
>>>
>>> On Wednesday 01 March 2017 04:13 PM, Cyrille Pitchen wrote:  
>>>> Le 01/03/2017 à 05:54, Vignesh R a écrit :  
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On Wednesday 01 March 2017 03:11 AM, Richard Weinberger wrote:  
>>>>>> Vignesh,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Am 27.02.2017 um 13:08 schrieb Vignesh R:  
>>>>>>> Many SPI controller drivers use DMA to read/write from m25p80 compatible
>>>>>>> flashes. Therefore enable bounce buffers support provided by spi-nor
>>>>>>> framework to take care of handling vmalloc'd buffers which may not be
>>>>>>> DMA'able.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Signed-off-by: Vignesh R <vigneshr at ti.com>
>>>>>>> ---
>>>>>>>  drivers/mtd/devices/m25p80.c | 1 +
>>>>>>>  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> diff --git a/drivers/mtd/devices/m25p80.c b/drivers/mtd/devices/m25p80.c
>>>>>>> index c4df3b1bded0..d05acf22eadf 100644
>>>>>>> --- a/drivers/mtd/devices/m25p80.c
>>>>>>> +++ b/drivers/mtd/devices/m25p80.c
>>>>>>> @@ -241,6 +241,7 @@ static int m25p_probe(struct spi_device *spi)
>>>>>>>  	else
>>>>>>>  		flash_name = spi->modalias;
>>>>>>>  
>>>>>>> +	nor->flags |= SNOR_F_USE_BOUNCE_BUFFER;  
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Isn't there a better way to detect whether a bounce buffer is needed or not?  
>>>>>  
>>>>
>>>> I agree with Richard: the bounce buffer should be enabled only if needed
>>>> by the SPI controller.
>>>>  
>>>>> Yes, I can poke the spi->master struct to see of dma channels are
>>>>> populated and request SNOR_F_USE_BOUNCE_BUFFER accordingly:
>>>>>
>>>>> -       nor->flags |= SNOR_F_USE_BOUNCE_BUFFER;
>>>>> +       if (spi->master->dma_tx || spi->master->dma_rx)
>>>>> +               nor->flags |= SNOR_F_USE_BOUNCE_BUFFER;
>>>>> +
>>>>>  
>>>>
>>>> However I don't agree with this solution: master->dma_{tx|rx} can be set
>>>> for SPI controllers which already rely on spi_map_msg() to handle
>>>> vmalloc'ed memory during DMA transfers.
>>>> Such SPI controllers don't need the spi-nor bounce buffer.
>>>>
>>>> spi_map_msg() can build a scatter-gather list from vmalloc'ed buffer
>>>> then map this sg list with dma_map_sg(). AFAIK, It is safe to do so for
>>>> architectures using PIPT caches since the possible cache aliases issue
>>>> present for VIPT or VIVT caches is always avoided for PIPT caches.
>>>>
>>>> For instance, the drivers/spi/spi-atmel.c driver relies on spi_map_sg()
>>>> to be called from the SPI sub-system to handle vmalloc'ed buffers and
>>>> both master->dma_tx and master->dma_rx are set by the this driver.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> By the way, Is there any case where the same physical page is actually
>>>> mapped into two different virtual addresses for the buffers allocated by
>>>> the MTD sub-system? Because for a long time now I wonder whether the
>>>> cache aliases issue is a real or only theoretical issue but I have no
>>>> answer to that question.
>>>>  
>>>
>>> I have atleast one evidence of VIVT aliasing causing problem. Please see
>>> this thread on DMA issues with davinci-spi driver
>>> https://www.spinics.net/lists/arm-kernel/msg563420.html
>>> https://www.spinics.net/lists/arm-kernel/msg563445.html
>>>   
>>>> Then my next question: is spi_map_msg() enough in every case, even with
>>>> VIPT or VIVT caches?
>>>>  
>>>
>>> Not really, I am debugging another issue with UBIFS on DRA74 EVM (ARM
>>> cortex-a15) wherein pages allocated by vmalloc are in highmem region
>>> that are not addressable using 32 bit addresses and is backed by LPAE.
>>> So, a 32 bit DMA cannot access these buffers at all.
>>> When dma_map_sg() is called to map these pages by spi_map_buf() the
>>> physical address is just truncated to 32 bit in pfn_to_dma() (as part of
>>> dma_map_sg() call). This results in random crashes as DMA starts
>>> accessing random memory during SPI read.
>>>
>>> IMO, there may be more undiscovered caveat with using dma_map_sg() for
>>> non kmalloc'd buffers and its better that spi-nor starts handling these
>>> buffers instead of relying on spi_map_msg() and working around every
>>> time something pops up.
>>>   
>>
>> Both Frode and you confirmed that the alias issue does occur at least
>> with VIVT caches, hence we can't rely on spi_map_msg() in that case.
>> So I agree with you: adding a bounce buffer in spi-nor seems to be a
>> good solution at least till some rework is done in the ubifs layer, as
>> proposed by Boris, to replace vmalloc'ed buffers by kmalloc'ed memory.
> 
> We should keep it even after reworking UBI/UBIFS, because UBI is just
> one user of MTD, and other users might pass vmalloc-ed or kmap-ed bufs.
> 
> 

I'm fine with that :)