From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.9 required=3.0 tests=DKIMWL_WL_HIGH,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI, MENTIONS_GIT_HOSTING,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,URIBL_BLOCKED, URIBL_DBL_ABUSE_MALW,USER_AGENT_SANE_1 autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0DD24C35249 for ; Wed, 5 Feb 2020 08:29:26 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C9A862085B for ; Wed, 5 Feb 2020 08:29:25 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=ti.com header.i=@ti.com header.b="QBGgSXL4" Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1727068AbgBEI3Z (ORCPT ); Wed, 5 Feb 2020 03:29:25 -0500 Received: from fllv0015.ext.ti.com ([198.47.19.141]:60608 "EHLO fllv0015.ext.ti.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1726490AbgBEI3Y (ORCPT ); Wed, 5 Feb 2020 03:29:24 -0500 Received: from lelv0266.itg.ti.com ([10.180.67.225]) by fllv0015.ext.ti.com (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTP id 0158TLex011830; Wed, 5 Feb 2020 02:29:21 -0600 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=ti.com; s=ti-com-17Q1; t=1580891361; bh=4oK9YdhqZWluCHwyBCGvW+a+C9BUXc1zb6pM3j/qtsc=; h=Subject:To:CC:References:From:Date:In-Reply-To; b=QBGgSXL4NEvqL3KDpD8Bri+gh840FxyqIrE3bQSUKfDeeqv6ZLH2M3dRA9ndwrpAI dyFYe5+zUPEsTpm0nnsNDID6f9zY4spch/xaWezgSB+pFkNSOY83k+cBrqaf4MnNmu pUvFN2XhvJWlnaBq6NrMJDBSE+r/9ZMlefHbAlCw= Received: from DLEE110.ent.ti.com (dlee110.ent.ti.com [157.170.170.21]) by lelv0266.itg.ti.com (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTPS id 0158TLJF119163 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=FAIL); Wed, 5 Feb 2020 02:29:21 -0600 Received: from DLEE110.ent.ti.com (157.170.170.21) by DLEE110.ent.ti.com (157.170.170.21) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_128_CBC_SHA256_P256) id 15.1.1847.3; Wed, 5 Feb 2020 02:29:21 -0600 Received: from lelv0327.itg.ti.com (10.180.67.183) by DLEE110.ent.ti.com (157.170.170.21) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_128_CBC_SHA256_P256) id 15.1.1847.3 via Frontend Transport; Wed, 5 Feb 2020 02:29:21 -0600 Received: from [10.24.69.159] (ileax41-snat.itg.ti.com [10.172.224.153]) by lelv0327.itg.ti.com (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTP id 0158TJW5120032; Wed, 5 Feb 2020 02:29:20 -0600 Subject: Re: pci-usb/pci-sata broken with LPAE config after "reduce use of block bounce buffers" To: Christoph Hellwig CC: "linux-pci@vger.kernel.org" References: <120f7c3e-363d-deb0-a347-782ac869ee0d@ti.com> <20200130075833.GC30735@lst.de> <4a41bd0d-6491-3822-172a-fbca8a6abba5@ti.com> <20200130164235.GA6705@lst.de> <20200203142155.GA16388@lst.de> <20200205074719.GA22701@lst.de> From: Kishon Vijay Abraham I Message-ID: <4a8bf1d3-6f8e-d13e-eae0-4db54f5cab8c@ti.com> Date: Wed, 5 Feb 2020 14:02:51 +0530 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:60.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/60.9.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20200205074719.GA22701@lst.de> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-EXCLAIMER-MD-CONFIG: e1e8a2fd-e40a-4ac6-ac9b-f7e9cc9ee180 Sender: linux-pci-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-pci@vger.kernel.org Christoph, On 05/02/20 1:17 PM, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > On Wed, Feb 05, 2020 at 10:45:24AM +0530, Kishon Vijay Abraham I wrote: >>> Ok, this mostly like means we allocate a swiotlb buffer that isn't >>> actually addressable. To verify that can you post the output with the >>> first attached patch? If it shows the overflow message added there, >>> please try if the second patch fixes it. >> >> I'm seeing some sort of busy loop after applying your 1st patch. I sent >> a SysRq to see where it is stuck > > And that shows up just with the patch? Really strange as it doesn't > change any blockig points. What also is strange is that I don't see > any of the warnings that should be there. FYI, the slightly updated > version of the patch that went through my testing it here: > > git://git.infradead.org/users/hch/misc.git swiotlb-debug > > Gitweb: > > http://git.infradead.org/users/hch/misc.git/shortlog/refs/heads/swiotlb-debug > > this also includes what was the second patch in the previous mail. Can > you try that branch? I see data mismatch with that branch. Kernel log: https://pastebin.ubuntu.com/p/9g9cm7GzRh/ Kernel Config: https://pastebin.ubuntu.com/p/gYfpRDdVry/ Repo: https://github.com/kishon/linux-wip.git swiotlb-debug (Added an additional patch for fixing a interrupt issue over your branch). Thanks Kishon