Linux-PCI Archive on lore.kernel.org
 help / color / Atom feed
From: Rob Herring <robh@kernel.org>
To: Marek Vasut <marek.vasut@gmail.com>
Cc: Lorenzo Pieralisi <lorenzo.pieralisi@arm.com>,
	PCI <linux-pci@vger.kernel.org>,
	Geert Uytterhoeven <geert+renesas@glider.be>,
	Wolfram Sang <wsa@the-dreams.de>,
	"open list:MEDIA DRIVERS FOR RENESAS - FCP" 
	<linux-renesas-soc@vger.kernel.org>,
	Robin Murphy <robin.murphy@arm.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH V3 2/3] PCI: rcar: Do not abort on too many inbound dma-ranges
Date: Wed, 16 Oct 2019 17:26:16 -0500
Message-ID: <CAL_JsqLzmk5dfn0Re3y7VjY5ehE29vKLOV-2tM5B_jPbB2YiPQ@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <88099c4f-4fb4-626e-f66f-3eb8861dfb2c@gmail.com>

On Wed, Oct 16, 2019 at 4:16 PM Marek Vasut <marek.vasut@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On 10/16/19 10:25 PM, Rob Herring wrote:
> [...]
> >>>>>>> The firmware cannot decide the policy for the next stage (Linux in
> >>>>>>> this case) on which ranges are better to use for Linux and which are
> >>>>>>> less good. Linux can then decide which ranges are best suited for it
> >>>>>>> and ignore the other ones.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> dma-ranges is a property that is used by other kernel subsystems eg
> >>>>>> IOMMU other than the RCAR host controller driver. The policy, provided
> >>>>>> there is one should be shared across them. You can't leave a PCI
> >>>>>> host controller half-programmed and expect other subsystems (that
> >>>>>> *expect* those ranges to be DMA'ble) to work.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> I reiterate my point: if firmware is broken it is better to fail
> >>>>>> the probe rather than limp on hoping that things will keep on
> >>>>>> working.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> But the firmware is not broken ?
> >>>>
> >>>> See above, it depends on how the dma-ranges property is interpreted,
> >>>> hopefully we can reach consensus in this thread, I won't merge a patch
> >>>> that can backfire later unless we all agree that what it does is
> >>>> correct.
> >>>
> >>> Defining more dma-ranges entries than the h/w has inbound windows for
> >>> sounds like a broken DT to me.
> >>>
> >>> What exactly does dma-ranges contain in this case? I'm not really
> >>> visualizing how different clients would pick different dma-ranges
> >>> entries.
> >>
> >> You can have multiple non-continuous DRAM banks for example. And an
> >> entry for SRAM optionally. Each DRAM bank and/or the SRAM should have a
> >> separate dma-ranges entry, right ?
> >
> > Not necessarily. We really only want to define the minimum we have to.
> > The ideal system is no dma-ranges. Is each bank at a different
> > relative position compared to the CPU's view of the system. That would
> > seem doubtful for just DRAM banks. Perhaps DRAM and SRAM could change.
>
> Is that a question ? Anyway, yes, there is a bit of DRAM below the 32bit
> boundary and some more above the 32bit boundary. These two banks don't
> need to be continuous. And then you could add the SRAM into the mix.

Continuous is irrelevant. My question was in more specific terms is
(bank1 addr - bank0 addr) different for CPU's view (i.e phys addr) vs.
PCI host view (i.e. bus addr)? If not, then that is 1 translation and
1 dma-ranges entry.

> > I suppose if your intent is to use inbound windows as a poor man's
> > IOMMU to prevent accesses to the holes, then yes you would list them
> > out. But I think that's wrong and difficult to maintain. You'd also
> > need to deal with reserved-memory regions too.
>
> What's the problem with that? The bootloader has all that information
> and can patch the DT correctly. In fact, in my specific case, I have
> platform which can be populated with differently sized DRAM, so the
> holes are also dynamically calculated ; there is no one DT then, the
> bootloader is responsible to generate the dma-ranges accordingly.

The problems are it doesn't work:

Your dma-mask and offset are not going to be correct.

You are running out of inbound windows. Your patch does nothing to
solve that. The solution would be merging multiple dma-ranges entries
to a single inbound window. We'd have to do that both for dma-mask and
inbound windows. The former would also have to figure out which
entries apply to setting up dma-mask. I'm simply suggesting just do
that up front and avoid any pointless splits.

You are setting up random inbound windows. The bootloader can't assume
what order the OS parses dma-ranges, and the OS can't assume what
order the bootloader writes the entries.

Rob

  reply index

Thread overview: 48+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2019-08-09 17:57 [PATCH V3 1/3] PCI: rcar: Move the inbound index check marek.vasut
2019-08-09 17:57 ` [PATCH V3 2/3] PCI: rcar: Do not abort on too many inbound dma-ranges marek.vasut
2019-08-16 13:23   ` Simon Horman
2019-08-16 13:28     ` Marek Vasut
2019-08-16 13:38       ` Simon Horman
2019-08-16 17:41         ` Marek Vasut
2019-10-21 10:18       ` Andrew Murray
2019-10-26 18:03         ` Marek Vasut
2019-10-26 20:36           ` Andrew Murray
2019-10-26 21:06             ` Andrew Murray
2019-11-06 23:37             ` Marek Vasut
2019-11-07 14:19               ` Andrew Murray
2019-10-16 15:00   ` Lorenzo Pieralisi
2019-10-16 15:10     ` Marek Vasut
2019-10-16 15:26       ` Lorenzo Pieralisi
2019-10-16 15:29         ` Marek Vasut
2019-10-16 16:18           ` Lorenzo Pieralisi
2019-10-16 18:12             ` Rob Herring
2019-10-16 18:17               ` Marek Vasut
2019-10-16 20:25                 ` Rob Herring
2019-10-16 21:15                   ` Marek Vasut
2019-10-16 22:26                     ` Rob Herring [this message]
2019-10-16 22:33                       ` Marek Vasut
2019-10-17  7:06                         ` Geert Uytterhoeven
2019-10-17 10:55                           ` Marek Vasut
2019-10-17 13:06                             ` Robin Murphy
2019-10-17 14:00                               ` Marek Vasut
2019-10-17 14:36                                 ` Rob Herring
2019-10-17 15:01                                   ` Marek Vasut
2019-10-18  9:53                                     ` Lorenzo Pieralisi
2019-10-18 12:22                                       ` Marek Vasut
2019-10-18 12:53                                         ` Robin Murphy
2019-10-18 14:26                                           ` Marek Vasut
2019-10-18 15:44                                             ` Robin Murphy
2019-10-18 16:44                                               ` Marek Vasut
2019-10-18 17:35                                                 ` Robin Murphy
2019-10-18 18:44                                                   ` Marek Vasut
2019-10-21  8:32                                                     ` Geert Uytterhoeven
2019-10-18 10:06                         ` Andrew Murray
2019-10-18 10:17                           ` Geert Uytterhoeven
2019-10-18 11:40                             ` Andrew Murray
2019-08-09 17:57 ` [PATCH V3 3/3] PCI: rcar: Recalculate inbound range alignment for each controller entry marek.vasut
2019-10-21 10:39   ` Andrew Murray
2019-08-16 10:52 ` [PATCH V3 1/3] PCI: rcar: Move the inbound index check Lorenzo Pieralisi
2019-08-16 10:59   ` Marek Vasut
2019-08-16 11:10     ` Lorenzo Pieralisi
2019-10-15 20:14 ` Marek Vasut
2019-10-21 10:11 ` Andrew Murray

Reply instructions:

You may reply publically 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=CAL_JsqLzmk5dfn0Re3y7VjY5ehE29vKLOV-2tM5B_jPbB2YiPQ@mail.gmail.com \
    --to=robh@kernel.org \
    --cc=geert+renesas@glider.be \
    --cc=linux-pci@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-renesas-soc@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=lorenzo.pieralisi@arm.com \
    --cc=marek.vasut@gmail.com \
    --cc=robin.murphy@arm.com \
    --cc=wsa@the-dreams.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: link

Linux-PCI Archive on lore.kernel.org

Archives are clonable:
	git clone --mirror https://lore.kernel.org/linux-pci/0 linux-pci/git/0.git

	# If you have public-inbox 1.1+ installed, you may
	# initialize and index your mirror using the following commands:
	public-inbox-init -V2 linux-pci linux-pci/ https://lore.kernel.org/linux-pci \
		linux-pci@vger.kernel.org
	public-inbox-index linux-pci

Example config snippet for mirrors

Newsgroup available over NNTP:
	nntp://nntp.lore.kernel.org/org.kernel.vger.linux-pci


AGPL code for this site: git clone https://public-inbox.org/public-inbox.git