From: Peter Geis <pgwipeout@gmail.com> To: Marc Zyngier <maz@kernel.org> Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>, "open list:ARM/Rockchip SoC..." <linux-rockchip@lists.infradead.org>, Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org> Subject: Re: [RFC] ITS fails to allocate on rk3568/rk3566 Date: Wed, 14 Apr 2021 07:41:20 -0400 [thread overview] Message-ID: <CAMdYzYo2+h+=39cw1t=11HUih-O+NUs4hhNaPbrU6si-AbqNiA@mail.gmail.com> (raw) In-Reply-To: <87tuoambdb.wl-maz@kernel.org> On Tue, Apr 13, 2021 at 11:51 AM Marc Zyngier <maz@kernel.org> wrote: > > On Tue, 13 Apr 2021 16:03:51 +0100, > Peter Geis <pgwipeout@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > On Tue, Apr 13, 2021 at 10:01 AM Marc Zyngier <maz@kernel.org> wrote: > > [...] > > > > What happens if you hack all the allocations to happen in the low 4GB > > > of the PA space? > > > > It seems to work correctly. > > The downstream hacks used GFP_DMA32 which gets discarded by > > kmalloc_fix_flags on certain allocations. > > Switching to GFP_DMA seems to have satisfied it, but it feels wrong > > using this code. > > Need to check the corner cases to make sure I'm not missing something. > > The problem is that GFP_DMA doesn't always mean the same thing. > Overall, we need to hear from Rockchip about the exact nature of the > problem, and then we *may* be able to work something out. From what I've read, GFP_DMA allocates as low as possible, while GFP_DMA32 ensures it's in the 32 bit address range, am I understanding this correctly? Is there a reason GFP_DMA is permitted while GFP_DMA32 is not, aside from backwards compatibility? (I saw the notes about how we aren't really supposed to rely on these flags) I've also confirmed that their disabling shareability and caching is necessary. > > I'd also like to understand whether it is broken because you happen to > have pre-release silicon that will never make it into the wild, or if > this is the real thing that is going to ship on millions of devices. My understanding is these chips are samples prior to the full production run, but we are waiting on official comment from Rockchip about this particular errata. > > Thanks, > > M. > > -- > Without deviation from the norm, progress is not possible.
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Peter Geis <pgwipeout@gmail.com> To: Marc Zyngier <maz@kernel.org> Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>, "open list:ARM/Rockchip SoC..." <linux-rockchip@lists.infradead.org>, Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org> Subject: Re: [RFC] ITS fails to allocate on rk3568/rk3566 Date: Wed, 14 Apr 2021 07:41:20 -0400 [thread overview] Message-ID: <CAMdYzYo2+h+=39cw1t=11HUih-O+NUs4hhNaPbrU6si-AbqNiA@mail.gmail.com> (raw) In-Reply-To: <87tuoambdb.wl-maz@kernel.org> On Tue, Apr 13, 2021 at 11:51 AM Marc Zyngier <maz@kernel.org> wrote: > > On Tue, 13 Apr 2021 16:03:51 +0100, > Peter Geis <pgwipeout@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > On Tue, Apr 13, 2021 at 10:01 AM Marc Zyngier <maz@kernel.org> wrote: > > [...] > > > > What happens if you hack all the allocations to happen in the low 4GB > > > of the PA space? > > > > It seems to work correctly. > > The downstream hacks used GFP_DMA32 which gets discarded by > > kmalloc_fix_flags on certain allocations. > > Switching to GFP_DMA seems to have satisfied it, but it feels wrong > > using this code. > > Need to check the corner cases to make sure I'm not missing something. > > The problem is that GFP_DMA doesn't always mean the same thing. > Overall, we need to hear from Rockchip about the exact nature of the > problem, and then we *may* be able to work something out. From what I've read, GFP_DMA allocates as low as possible, while GFP_DMA32 ensures it's in the 32 bit address range, am I understanding this correctly? Is there a reason GFP_DMA is permitted while GFP_DMA32 is not, aside from backwards compatibility? (I saw the notes about how we aren't really supposed to rely on these flags) I've also confirmed that their disabling shareability and caching is necessary. > > I'd also like to understand whether it is broken because you happen to > have pre-release silicon that will never make it into the wild, or if > this is the real thing that is going to ship on millions of devices. My understanding is these chips are samples prior to the full production run, but we are waiting on official comment from Rockchip about this particular errata. > > Thanks, > > M. > > -- > Without deviation from the norm, progress is not possible. _______________________________________________ Linux-rockchip mailing list Linux-rockchip@lists.infradead.org http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-rockchip
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2021-04-14 11:41 UTC|newest] Thread overview: 24+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top 2021-04-12 20:49 [RFC] ITS fails to allocate on rk3568/rk3566 Peter Geis 2021-04-12 20:49 ` Peter Geis 2021-04-13 9:23 ` Marc Zyngier 2021-04-13 9:23 ` Marc Zyngier [not found] ` <CAMdYzYruPyiT89FrbJhuV=c36PyRwZ7sT45abnv8rTv85AKRow@mail.gmail.com> [not found] ` <87y2dmmggt.wl-maz@kernel.org> 2021-04-13 15:03 ` Peter Geis 2021-04-13 15:03 ` Peter Geis 2021-04-13 15:51 ` Marc Zyngier 2021-04-13 15:51 ` Marc Zyngier 2021-04-14 11:41 ` Peter Geis [this message] 2021-04-14 11:41 ` Peter Geis 2021-04-14 12:42 ` Marc Zyngier 2021-04-14 12:42 ` Marc Zyngier 2021-04-15 7:24 ` Kever Yang 2021-04-15 7:24 ` Kever Yang 2021-04-15 8:11 ` Marc Zyngier 2021-04-15 8:11 ` Marc Zyngier 2021-04-16 1:13 ` Kever Yang 2021-04-16 1:13 ` Kever Yang 2021-04-16 15:23 ` Marc Zyngier 2021-04-16 15:23 ` Marc Zyngier 2021-04-21 1:40 ` Kever Yang 2021-04-21 1:40 ` Kever Yang 2021-04-21 10:23 ` Marc Zyngier 2021-04-21 10:23 ` Marc Zyngier
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='CAMdYzYo2+h+=39cw1t=11HUih-O+NUs4hhNaPbrU6si-AbqNiA@mail.gmail.com' \ --to=pgwipeout@gmail.com \ --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \ --cc=linux-rockchip@lists.infradead.org \ --cc=maz@kernel.org \ --cc=tglx@linutronix.de \ /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: linkBe 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.