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

From: David Laight <David.Laight@ACULAB.COM>
To: 'Christoph Hellwig' <hch@lst.de>,
	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
Cc: "Robin Murphy" <robin.murphy@arm.com>,
	"Toke Høiland-Jørgensen" <toke@toke.dk>,
	"Halil Pasic" <pasic@linux.ibm.com>,
	"Oleksandr Natalenko" <oleksandr@natalenko.name>,
	"Marek Szyprowski" <m.szyprowski@samsung.com>,
	"Kalle Valo" <kvalo@kernel.org>,
	"David S. Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>,
	"Jakub Kicinski" <kuba@kernel.org>,
	"Paolo Abeni" <pabeni@redhat.com>,
	"Olha Cherevyk" <olha.cherevyk@gmail.com>,
	iommu <iommu@lists.linux-foundation.org>,
	linux-wireless <linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org>,
	Netdev <netdev@vger.kernel.org>,
	"Linux Kernel Mailing List" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	"Greg Kroah-Hartman" <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>,
	stable <stable@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: RE: [REGRESSION] Recent swiotlb DMA_FROM_DEVICE fixes break ath9k-based AP
Date: Mon, 28 Mar 2022 08:15:29 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <eb33d98e65104d98abf9bd752787a9ea@AcuMS.aculab.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20220328063723.GA29405@lst.de>

From: Christoph Hellwig
> Sent: 28 March 2022 07:37
> 
> On Fri, Mar 25, 2022 at 11:46:09AM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> > I think my list of three different sync cases (not just two! It's not
> > just about whether to sync for the CPU or the device, it's also about
> > what direction the data itself is taking) is correct.
> >
> > But maybe I'm wrong.
> 
> At the high level you are correct.  It is all about which direction
> the data is taking.  That is the direction argument that all the
> map/unmap/sync call take.  The sync calls then just toggle the ownership.
> You seem to hate that ownership concept, but I don't see how things
> could work without that ownership concept as we're going to be in
> trouble without having that.  And yes, a peek operation could work in
> some cases, but it would have to be at the cache line granularity.

I don't think it is really 'ownership' but more about who has
write access.
Only one side can have write access (to a cache line [1]) at any
one time.

Read access is different.
You need a 'synchronise' action to pick up newly written data.
This might be a data copy, cache flush or cache invalidate.
It only need affect the area that needs to be read - not
full buffer.
Partial cache flush/invalidate will almost certainly speed
up receipt of short network packets that are copied into a
new skb - leaving the old one mapped for another receive.

[1] The cache line size might be a property of the device
and dma subsystem, not just the cpu.
I have used hardware when the effective size was 1kB.

	David

-
Registered Address Lakeside, Bramley Road, Mount Farm, Milton Keynes, MK1 1PT, UK
Registration No: 1397386 (Wales)