* [PATCH 1/4] RDMA/core: Fix ib_dma_max_seg_size()
[not found] <20191021021030.1037-1-bvanassche@acm.org>
@ 2019-10-21 2:10 ` Bart Van Assche
2019-10-21 14:09 ` Jason Gunthorpe
0 siblings, 1 reply; 5+ messages in thread
From: Bart Van Assche @ 2019-10-21 2:10 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Jason Gunthorpe
Cc: Leon Romanovsky, Doug Ledford, linux-rdma, Bart Van Assche,
Christoph Hellwig, stable
If dev->dma_device->params == NULL then the maximum DMA segment size is
64 KB. See also the dma_get_max_seg_size() implementation. This patch
fixes the following kernel warning:
DMA-API: infiniband rxe0: mapping sg segment longer than device claims to support [len=126976] [max=65536]
WARNING: CPU: 4 PID: 4848 at kernel/dma/debug.c:1220 debug_dma_map_sg+0x3d9/0x450
RIP: 0010:debug_dma_map_sg+0x3d9/0x450
Call Trace:
srp_queuecommand+0x626/0x18d0 [ib_srp]
scsi_queue_rq+0xd02/0x13e0 [scsi_mod]
__blk_mq_try_issue_directly+0x2b3/0x3f0
blk_mq_request_issue_directly+0xac/0xf0
blk_insert_cloned_request+0xdf/0x170
dm_mq_queue_rq+0x43d/0x830 [dm_mod]
__blk_mq_try_issue_directly+0x2b3/0x3f0
blk_mq_request_issue_directly+0xac/0xf0
blk_mq_try_issue_list_directly+0xb8/0x170
blk_mq_sched_insert_requests+0x23c/0x3b0
blk_mq_flush_plug_list+0x529/0x730
blk_flush_plug_list+0x21f/0x260
blk_mq_make_request+0x56b/0xf20
generic_make_request+0x196/0x660
submit_bio+0xae/0x290
blkdev_direct_IO+0x822/0x900
generic_file_direct_write+0x110/0x200
__generic_file_write_iter+0x124/0x2a0
blkdev_write_iter+0x168/0x270
aio_write+0x1c4/0x310
io_submit_one+0x971/0x1390
__x64_sys_io_submit+0x12a/0x390
do_syscall_64+0x6f/0x2e0
entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x49/0xbe
Cc: Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>
Cc: <stable@vger.kernel.org>
Fixes: 0b5cb3300ae5 ("RDMA/srp: Increase max_segment_size")
Signed-off-by: Bart Van Assche <bvanassche@acm.org>
---
include/rdma/ib_verbs.h | 4 +---
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 3 deletions(-)
diff --git a/include/rdma/ib_verbs.h b/include/rdma/ib_verbs.h
index 6a47ba85c54c..e6c167d03aae 100644
--- a/include/rdma/ib_verbs.h
+++ b/include/rdma/ib_verbs.h
@@ -4043,9 +4043,7 @@ static inline void ib_dma_unmap_sg_attrs(struct ib_device *dev,
*/
static inline unsigned int ib_dma_max_seg_size(struct ib_device *dev)
{
- struct device_dma_parameters *p = dev->dma_device->dma_parms;
-
- return p ? p->max_segment_size : UINT_MAX;
+ return dma_get_max_seg_size(dev->dma_device);
}
/**
--
2.23.0
^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH 1/4] RDMA/core: Fix ib_dma_max_seg_size()
2019-10-21 2:10 ` [PATCH 1/4] RDMA/core: Fix ib_dma_max_seg_size() Bart Van Assche
@ 2019-10-21 14:09 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2019-10-21 15:03 ` Bart Van Assche
0 siblings, 1 reply; 5+ messages in thread
From: Jason Gunthorpe @ 2019-10-21 14:09 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Bart Van Assche
Cc: Leon Romanovsky, Doug Ledford, linux-rdma, Christoph Hellwig, stable
On Sun, Oct 20, 2019 at 07:10:27PM -0700, Bart Van Assche wrote:
> If dev->dma_device->params == NULL then the maximum DMA segment size is
> 64 KB. See also the dma_get_max_seg_size() implementation. This patch
> fixes the following kernel warning:
>
> DMA-API: infiniband rxe0: mapping sg segment longer than device claims to support [len=126976] [max=65536]
> WARNING: CPU: 4 PID: 4848 at kernel/dma/debug.c:1220 debug_dma_map_sg+0x3d9/0x450
> RIP: 0010:debug_dma_map_sg+0x3d9/0x450
> Call Trace:
> srp_queuecommand+0x626/0x18d0 [ib_srp]
> scsi_queue_rq+0xd02/0x13e0 [scsi_mod]
> __blk_mq_try_issue_directly+0x2b3/0x3f0
> blk_mq_request_issue_directly+0xac/0xf0
> blk_insert_cloned_request+0xdf/0x170
> dm_mq_queue_rq+0x43d/0x830 [dm_mod]
> __blk_mq_try_issue_directly+0x2b3/0x3f0
> blk_mq_request_issue_directly+0xac/0xf0
> blk_mq_try_issue_list_directly+0xb8/0x170
> blk_mq_sched_insert_requests+0x23c/0x3b0
> blk_mq_flush_plug_list+0x529/0x730
> blk_flush_plug_list+0x21f/0x260
> blk_mq_make_request+0x56b/0xf20
> generic_make_request+0x196/0x660
> submit_bio+0xae/0x290
> blkdev_direct_IO+0x822/0x900
> generic_file_direct_write+0x110/0x200
> __generic_file_write_iter+0x124/0x2a0
> blkdev_write_iter+0x168/0x270
> aio_write+0x1c4/0x310
> io_submit_one+0x971/0x1390
> __x64_sys_io_submit+0x12a/0x390
> do_syscall_64+0x6f/0x2e0
> entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x49/0xbe
>
> Cc: Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>
> Cc: <stable@vger.kernel.org>
> Fixes: 0b5cb3300ae5 ("RDMA/srp: Increase max_segment_size")
> Signed-off-by: Bart Van Assche <bvanassche@acm.org>
> include/rdma/ib_verbs.h | 4 +---
> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 3 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/include/rdma/ib_verbs.h b/include/rdma/ib_verbs.h
> index 6a47ba85c54c..e6c167d03aae 100644
> +++ b/include/rdma/ib_verbs.h
> @@ -4043,9 +4043,7 @@ static inline void ib_dma_unmap_sg_attrs(struct ib_device *dev,
> */
> static inline unsigned int ib_dma_max_seg_size(struct ib_device *dev)
> {
> - struct device_dma_parameters *p = dev->dma_device->dma_parms;
> -
> - return p ? p->max_segment_size : UINT_MAX;
> + return dma_get_max_seg_size(dev->dma_device);
> }
Should we get rid of this wrapper?
Jason
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH 1/4] RDMA/core: Fix ib_dma_max_seg_size()
2019-10-21 14:09 ` Jason Gunthorpe
@ 2019-10-21 15:03 ` Bart Van Assche
2019-10-21 15:27 ` Jason Gunthorpe
0 siblings, 1 reply; 5+ messages in thread
From: Bart Van Assche @ 2019-10-21 15:03 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Jason Gunthorpe
Cc: Leon Romanovsky, Doug Ledford, linux-rdma, Christoph Hellwig, stable
On 10/21/19 7:09 AM, Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
> On Sun, Oct 20, 2019 at 07:10:27PM -0700, Bart Van Assche wrote:
>> diff --git a/include/rdma/ib_verbs.h b/include/rdma/ib_verbs.h
>> index 6a47ba85c54c..e6c167d03aae 100644
>> +++ b/include/rdma/ib_verbs.h
>> @@ -4043,9 +4043,7 @@ static inline void ib_dma_unmap_sg_attrs(struct ib_device *dev,
>> */
>> static inline unsigned int ib_dma_max_seg_size(struct ib_device *dev)
>> {
>> - struct device_dma_parameters *p = dev->dma_device->dma_parms;
>> -
>> - return p ? p->max_segment_size : UINT_MAX;
>> + return dma_get_max_seg_size(dev->dma_device);
>> }
>
> Should we get rid of this wrapper?
Hi Jason,
In general I agree that getting rid of single line inline functions is
good. In this case however I'd like to keep the wrapper such that RDMA
ULP code does not have to deal with the choice between dev->dma_device
and &dev->dev. From struct ib_device:
/* Do not access @dma_device directly from ULP nor from HW drivers. */
struct device *dma_device;
Thanks,
Bart.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH 1/4] RDMA/core: Fix ib_dma_max_seg_size()
2019-10-21 15:03 ` Bart Van Assche
@ 2019-10-21 15:27 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2019-10-21 15:56 ` Bart Van Assche
0 siblings, 1 reply; 5+ messages in thread
From: Jason Gunthorpe @ 2019-10-21 15:27 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Bart Van Assche
Cc: Leon Romanovsky, Doug Ledford, linux-rdma, Christoph Hellwig, stable
On Mon, Oct 21, 2019 at 08:03:32AM -0700, Bart Van Assche wrote:
> On 10/21/19 7:09 AM, Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
> > On Sun, Oct 20, 2019 at 07:10:27PM -0700, Bart Van Assche wrote:
> > > diff --git a/include/rdma/ib_verbs.h b/include/rdma/ib_verbs.h
> > > index 6a47ba85c54c..e6c167d03aae 100644
> > > +++ b/include/rdma/ib_verbs.h
> > > @@ -4043,9 +4043,7 @@ static inline void ib_dma_unmap_sg_attrs(struct ib_device *dev,
> > > */
> > > static inline unsigned int ib_dma_max_seg_size(struct ib_device *dev)
> > > {
> > > - struct device_dma_parameters *p = dev->dma_device->dma_parms;
> > > -
> > > - return p ? p->max_segment_size : UINT_MAX;
> > > + return dma_get_max_seg_size(dev->dma_device);
> > > }
> >
> > Should we get rid of this wrapper?
>
> Hi Jason,
>
> In general I agree that getting rid of single line inline functions is good.
> In this case however I'd like to keep the wrapper such that RDMA ULP code
> does not have to deal with the choice between dev->dma_device and &dev->dev.
> From struct ib_device:
> /* Do not access @dma_device directly from ULP nor from HW drivers. */
> struct device *dma_device;
Do you think it is a mistake we have dma_device at all?
Can the modern dma framework let us make the 'struct ib_device' into a
full dma_device that is still connected to some PCI device?
Jason
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH 1/4] RDMA/core: Fix ib_dma_max_seg_size()
2019-10-21 15:27 ` Jason Gunthorpe
@ 2019-10-21 15:56 ` Bart Van Assche
0 siblings, 0 replies; 5+ messages in thread
From: Bart Van Assche @ 2019-10-21 15:56 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Jason Gunthorpe
Cc: Leon Romanovsky, Doug Ledford, linux-rdma, Christoph Hellwig, stable
On 10/21/19 8:27 AM, Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 21, 2019 at 08:03:32AM -0700, Bart Van Assche wrote:
>> On 10/21/19 7:09 AM, Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
>>> On Sun, Oct 20, 2019 at 07:10:27PM -0700, Bart Van Assche wrote:
>>>> diff --git a/include/rdma/ib_verbs.h b/include/rdma/ib_verbs.h
>>>> index 6a47ba85c54c..e6c167d03aae 100644
>>>> +++ b/include/rdma/ib_verbs.h
>>>> @@ -4043,9 +4043,7 @@ static inline void ib_dma_unmap_sg_attrs(struct ib_device *dev,
>>>> */
>>>> static inline unsigned int ib_dma_max_seg_size(struct ib_device *dev)
>>>> {
>>>> - struct device_dma_parameters *p = dev->dma_device->dma_parms;
>>>> -
>>>> - return p ? p->max_segment_size : UINT_MAX;
>>>> + return dma_get_max_seg_size(dev->dma_device);
>>>> }
>>>
>>> Should we get rid of this wrapper?
>>
>> Hi Jason,
>>
>> In general I agree that getting rid of single line inline functions is good.
>> In this case however I'd like to keep the wrapper such that RDMA ULP code
>> does not have to deal with the choice between dev->dma_device and &dev->dev.
>> From struct ib_device:
>> /* Do not access @dma_device directly from ULP nor from HW drivers. */
>> struct device *dma_device;
>
> Do you think it is a mistake we have dma_device at all?
>
> Can the modern dma framework let us make the 'struct ib_device' into a
> full dma_device that is still connected to some PCI device?
Hi Jason,
My understanding is that dma_device is passed as the first argument to
DMA mapping functions. Before PCIe P2P support was introduced in the
RDMA code, the only struct device members used by DMA mapping functions
were dma_ops, dma_mask, coherent_dma_mask, bus_dma_mask and dma_parms. I
think it would have been sufficient to copy all these members from the
PCI device into struct ib_device before PCIe P2P support was introduced.
The dma_device pointer however is also passed to the pci_p2pdma_map_sg()
and pci_p2pdma_unmap_sg() functions. These functions use several
additional members of struct pci_dev. Although it may be possible to
eliminate the dma_device member, this may make maintaining the RDMA core
harder because setup_dma_device() will have to be modified every time a
DMA mapping function uses an additional member from struct device.
Bart.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2019-10-21 15:56 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 5+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
[not found] <20191021021030.1037-1-bvanassche@acm.org>
2019-10-21 2:10 ` [PATCH 1/4] RDMA/core: Fix ib_dma_max_seg_size() Bart Van Assche
2019-10-21 14:09 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2019-10-21 15:03 ` Bart Van Assche
2019-10-21 15:27 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2019-10-21 15:56 ` Bart Van Assche
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).