All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Vladimir Murzin <vladimir.murzin@arm.com>
To: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
Cc: Linux ARM <linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>,
	Alexandre Torgue <alexandre.torgue@st.com>,
	Russell King - ARM Linux <linux@armlinux.org.uk>,
	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	kbuild-all@01.org,
	Benjamin Gaignard <benjamin.gaignard@linaro.org>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
	Robin Murphy <robin.murphy@arm.com>,
	sza@esh.hu
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 6/7] ARM: NOMMU: Set ARM_DMA_MEM_BUFFERABLE for M-class cpus
Date: Wed, 19 Apr 2017 15:10:44 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <7eb9a87f-9b61-1367-311c-bc37430291e5@arm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAK8P3a1UH1qfCi5FC0aKxJvG=CNKOGSKbiU6Nz=0GA6Jit5Cpg@mail.gmail.com>

On 19/04/17 11:02, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 10, 2017 at 10:23 AM, Vladimir Murzin
> <vladimir.murzin@arm.com> wrote:
>> Now, we have dedicated non-cacheable region for consistent DMA
>> operations. However, that region can still be marked as bufferable by
>> MPU, so it'd be safer to have barriers by default.
>>
>> Tested-by: Benjamin Gaignard <benjamin.gaignard@linaro.org>
>> Tested-by: Andras Szemzo <sza@esh.hu>
>> Tested-by: Alexandre TORGUE <alexandre.torgue@st.com>
>> Reviewed-by: Robin Murphy <robin.murphy@arm.com>
>> Signed-off-by: Vladimir Murzin <vladimir.murzin@arm.com>
>> ---
>>  arch/arm/mm/Kconfig | 2 +-
>>  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/arch/arm/mm/Kconfig b/arch/arm/mm/Kconfig
>> index d731f28..7dd46ae 100644
>> --- a/arch/arm/mm/Kconfig
>> +++ b/arch/arm/mm/Kconfig
>> @@ -1050,7 +1050,7 @@ config ARM_L1_CACHE_SHIFT
>>
>>  config ARM_DMA_MEM_BUFFERABLE
>>         bool "Use non-cacheable memory for DMA" if (CPU_V6 || CPU_V6K) && !CPU_V7
>> -       default y if CPU_V6 || CPU_V6K || CPU_V7
>> +       default y if CPU_V6 || CPU_V6K || CPU_V7 || CPU_V7M
>>         help
>>           Historically, the kernel has used strongly ordered mappings to
>>           provide DMA coherent memory.  With the advent of ARMv7, mapping
> 
> The patch doesn't seem to match the description: I would have expected
> this to be user-selectable on CPU_V7M as we do on V6, but it is enabled
> unconditionally.
> 
> Can you either modify the description to explain why we now need this on
> all ARMv7M, or add a '|| CPU_V7M' for the 'bool' line to make it optional?
> 
> Would it be better to leave the default as disabled on CPU_V7M and
> require users to enable it manually? That way we don't regress the
> performance of readl/writel on platforms that don't need this.
> 

It is architectural vs implementation differences. Even though existing
implementations rarely need this sticking with architecture (it permits memory
re-ordering to happen in many cases) makes code more robust and save some
debugging time when more sophisticated implementations go wild (see, for
instance, 8e02676ffa69 "ARM: 8610/1: V7M: Add dsb before jumping in handler
mode"). We can consider making it user selectable if performance regressions
are reported.

Cheers
Vladimir

>      Arnd
> 

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: vladimir.murzin@arm.com (Vladimir Murzin)
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: [PATCH v3 6/7] ARM: NOMMU: Set ARM_DMA_MEM_BUFFERABLE for M-class cpus
Date: Wed, 19 Apr 2017 15:10:44 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <7eb9a87f-9b61-1367-311c-bc37430291e5@arm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAK8P3a1UH1qfCi5FC0aKxJvG=CNKOGSKbiU6Nz=0GA6Jit5Cpg@mail.gmail.com>

On 19/04/17 11:02, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 10, 2017 at 10:23 AM, Vladimir Murzin
> <vladimir.murzin@arm.com> wrote:
>> Now, we have dedicated non-cacheable region for consistent DMA
>> operations. However, that region can still be marked as bufferable by
>> MPU, so it'd be safer to have barriers by default.
>>
>> Tested-by: Benjamin Gaignard <benjamin.gaignard@linaro.org>
>> Tested-by: Andras Szemzo <sza@esh.hu>
>> Tested-by: Alexandre TORGUE <alexandre.torgue@st.com>
>> Reviewed-by: Robin Murphy <robin.murphy@arm.com>
>> Signed-off-by: Vladimir Murzin <vladimir.murzin@arm.com>
>> ---
>>  arch/arm/mm/Kconfig | 2 +-
>>  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/arch/arm/mm/Kconfig b/arch/arm/mm/Kconfig
>> index d731f28..7dd46ae 100644
>> --- a/arch/arm/mm/Kconfig
>> +++ b/arch/arm/mm/Kconfig
>> @@ -1050,7 +1050,7 @@ config ARM_L1_CACHE_SHIFT
>>
>>  config ARM_DMA_MEM_BUFFERABLE
>>         bool "Use non-cacheable memory for DMA" if (CPU_V6 || CPU_V6K) && !CPU_V7
>> -       default y if CPU_V6 || CPU_V6K || CPU_V7
>> +       default y if CPU_V6 || CPU_V6K || CPU_V7 || CPU_V7M
>>         help
>>           Historically, the kernel has used strongly ordered mappings to
>>           provide DMA coherent memory.  With the advent of ARMv7, mapping
> 
> The patch doesn't seem to match the description: I would have expected
> this to be user-selectable on CPU_V7M as we do on V6, but it is enabled
> unconditionally.
> 
> Can you either modify the description to explain why we now need this on
> all ARMv7M, or add a '|| CPU_V7M' for the 'bool' line to make it optional?
> 
> Would it be better to leave the default as disabled on CPU_V7M and
> require users to enable it manually? That way we don't regress the
> performance of readl/writel on platforms that don't need this.
> 

It is architectural vs implementation differences. Even though existing
implementations rarely need this sticking with architecture (it permits memory
re-ordering to happen in many cases) makes code more robust and save some
debugging time when more sophisticated implementations go wild (see, for
instance, 8e02676ffa69 "ARM: 8610/1: V7M: Add dsb before jumping in handler
mode"). We can consider making it user selectable if performance regressions
are reported.

Cheers
Vladimir

>      Arnd
> 

  reply	other threads:[~2017-04-19 14:10 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 46+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2017-03-10  9:23 [PATCH v3 0/7] ARM: Fix dma_alloc_coherent() and friends for NOMMU Vladimir Murzin
2017-03-10  9:23 ` Vladimir Murzin
2017-03-10  9:23 ` [PATCH v3 1/7] dma: Take into account dma_pfn_offset Vladimir Murzin
2017-03-10  9:23   ` Vladimir Murzin
2017-03-10  9:23 ` [PATCH v3 2/7] dma: Add simple dma_noop_mmap Vladimir Murzin
2017-03-10  9:23   ` Vladimir Murzin
2017-03-10  9:23 ` [PATCH v3 3/7] drivers: dma-coherent: Account dma_pfn_offset when used with device tree Vladimir Murzin
2017-03-10  9:23   ` Vladimir Murzin
2017-03-10  9:23 ` [PATCH v3 4/7] drivers: dma-coherent: Introduce default DMA pool Vladimir Murzin
2017-03-10  9:23   ` Vladimir Murzin
2017-03-10  9:23 ` [PATCH v3 5/7] ARM: NOMMU: Introduce dma operations for noMMU Vladimir Murzin
2017-03-10  9:23   ` Vladimir Murzin
2017-04-19 10:10   ` Arnd Bergmann
2017-04-19 10:10     ` Arnd Bergmann
2017-04-19 14:12     ` Vladimir Murzin
2017-04-19 14:12       ` Vladimir Murzin
2017-03-10  9:23 ` [PATCH v3 6/7] ARM: NOMMU: Set ARM_DMA_MEM_BUFFERABLE for M-class cpus Vladimir Murzin
2017-03-10  9:23   ` Vladimir Murzin
2017-04-19 10:02   ` Arnd Bergmann
2017-04-19 10:02     ` Arnd Bergmann
2017-04-19 14:10     ` Vladimir Murzin [this message]
2017-04-19 14:10       ` Vladimir Murzin
2017-04-21 22:12       ` Arnd Bergmann
2017-04-21 22:12         ` Arnd Bergmann
2017-03-10  9:23 ` [PATCH v3 7/7] ARM: dma-mapping: Remove traces of NOMMU code Vladimir Murzin
2017-03-10  9:23   ` Vladimir Murzin
2017-04-19  9:56   ` Arnd Bergmann
2017-04-19  9:56     ` Arnd Bergmann
2017-04-19 14:11     ` Vladimir Murzin
2017-04-19 14:11       ` Vladimir Murzin
2017-03-16  9:03 ` [PATCH v3 0/7] ARM: Fix dma_alloc_coherent() and friends for NOMMU Vladimir Murzin
2017-03-16  9:03   ` Vladimir Murzin
2017-03-22 12:23   ` Szemző András
2017-03-22 12:23     ` Szemző András
2017-03-23  9:26     ` Vladimir Murzin
2017-03-23  9:26       ` Vladimir Murzin
2017-03-29  8:17       ` Vladimir Murzin
2017-03-29  8:17         ` Vladimir Murzin
2017-04-18 12:51         ` Vladimir Murzin
2017-04-18 12:51           ` Vladimir Murzin
2017-04-19 11:56           ` Joerg Roedel
2017-04-19 11:56             ` Joerg Roedel
2017-04-19 14:20             ` Vladimir Murzin
2017-04-19 14:20               ` Vladimir Murzin
2017-05-11 14:44               ` Benjamin Gaignard
2017-05-11 14:44                 ` Benjamin Gaignard

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=7eb9a87f-9b61-1367-311c-bc37430291e5@arm.com \
    --to=vladimir.murzin@arm.com \
    --cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=alexandre.torgue@st.com \
    --cc=arnd@arndb.de \
    --cc=benjamin.gaignard@linaro.org \
    --cc=kbuild-all@01.org \
    --cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux@armlinux.org.uk \
    --cc=robin.murphy@arm.com \
    --cc=sza@esh.hu \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.