Re: [REGRESSION] Recent swiotlb DMA_FROM_DEVICE fixes break ath9k-based AP

["Toke Høiland-Jørgensen" <toke@toke.dk>]

Robin Murphy <robin.murphy@arm.com> writes:

> On 2022-03-24 16:31, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
>> On Thu, Mar 24, 2022 at 05:29:12PM +0100, Maxime Bizon wrote:
>>>> I'm looking into this; but in the interest of a speedy resolution of
>>>> the regression I would be in favour of merging that partial revert
>>>> and reinstating it if/when we identify (and fix) any bugs in ath9k :)
>>>
>>> This looks fishy:
>>>
>>> ath9k/recv.c
>>>
>>>                  /* We will now give hardware our shiny new allocated skb */
>>>                  new_buf_addr = dma_map_single(sc->dev, requeue_skb->data,
>>>                                                common->rx_bufsize, dma_type);
>>>                  if (unlikely(dma_mapping_error(sc->dev, new_buf_addr))) {
>>>                          dev_kfree_skb_any(requeue_skb);
>>>                          goto requeue_drop_frag;
>>>                  }
>>>
>>>                  /* Unmap the frame */
>>>                  dma_unmap_single(sc->dev, bf->bf_buf_addr,
>>>                                   common->rx_bufsize, dma_type);
>>>
>>>                  bf->bf_mpdu = requeue_skb;
>>>                  bf->bf_buf_addr = new_buf_addr;
>> 
>> Creating a new mapping for the same buffer before unmapping the
>> previous one does looks rather bogus.  But it does not fit the
>> pattern where revering the sync_single changes make the driver
>> work again.
>
> OK, you made me look :)
>
> Now that it's obvious what to look for, I can only conclude that during 
> the stanza in ath_edma_get_buffers(), the device is still writing to the 
> buffer while ownership has been transferred to the CPU, and whatever got 
> written while ath9k_hw_process_rxdesc_edma() was running then gets wiped 
> out by the subsequent sync_for_device, which currently resets the 
> SWIOTLB slot to the state that sync_for_cpu copied out. By the letter of 
> the DMA API that's not allowed, but on the other hand I'm not sure if we 
> even have a good idiom for "I can't tell if the device has finished with 
> this buffer or not unless I look at it" :/

Right, but is that sync_for_device call really needed? AFAICT, that
ath9k_hw_process_rxdesc_edma() invocation doesn't actually modify any of
the data when it returns EINPROGRESS, so could we just skip it? Like
the patch below? Or am I misunderstanding the semantics here?

-Toke


diff --git a/drivers/net/wireless/ath/ath9k/recv.c b/drivers/net/wireless/ath/ath9k/recv.c
index 0c0624a3b40d..19244d4c0ada 100644
--- a/drivers/net/wireless/ath/ath9k/recv.c
+++ b/drivers/net/wireless/ath/ath9k/recv.c
@@ -647,12 +647,8 @@ static bool ath_edma_get_buffers(struct ath_softc *sc,
                                common->rx_bufsize, DMA_FROM_DEVICE);
 
        ret = ath9k_hw_process_rxdesc_edma(ah, rs, skb->data);
-       if (ret == -EINPROGRESS) {
-               /*let device gain the buffer again*/
-               dma_sync_single_for_device(sc->dev, bf->bf_buf_addr,
-                               common->rx_bufsize, DMA_FROM_DEVICE);
+       if (ret == -EINPROGRESS)
                return false;
-       }
 
        __skb_unlink(skb, &rx_edma->rx_fifo);
        if (ret == -EINVAL) {