Re: 4.14-rc2 on thinkpad x220: out of memory when inserting mmc card
From: Linus Walleij <hidden>
Date: 2017-10-26 13:44:59
Also in:
linux-mmc, lkml
On Mon, Oct 23, 2017 at 11:27 PM, Pavel Machek [off-list ref] wrote:
On Mon 2017-10-23 14:16:40, Linus Walleij wrote:quoted
On Mon, Oct 23, 2017 at 11:31 AM, Pavel Machek [off-list ref] wrote:quoted
quoted
quoted
Thinkpad X220... how do I tell if I was using them? I believe so, because I uncovered bug in them before.You are certainly using bounce buffers. What does lspci -knn show?Here is the output: 0d:00.0 System peripheral [0880]: Ricoh Co Ltd PCIe SDXC/MMC Host Controller [1180:e823] (rev 07) Subsystem: Lenovo Device [17aa:21da] Kernel driver in use: sdhci-pciSo that is a Ricoh driver, one of the few that was supposed to benefit from bounce buffers. Except that if you actually turned it on:quoted
[10994.302196] kworker/2:1: page allocation failure: order:4,so it doesn't have enough memory to use these bounce buffers anyway.Well, look at archives: driver failed completely when allocation failed.
What I mean is that the allocation probably failed if you explicitly turned on the bounce buffer also *before* my patches (like if you were shopping for performance with the Ricoh driver and turn on bounce buffers) but I haven't tested it so what do I know. You could check out b5b6a5f4f06c0624886b2166e2e8580327f0b943 and enable MMC_BLOCK_BOUNCE and see what happens. And/or benchmark to see if it was actually improving your system or not.
quoted
I'm now feel it was the right thing to delete them.Which means I may have been geting benefit -- when it worked. I believe solution is to allocate at driver probing time.
I think the right way to get this benefit is to enhance the
Ricoh SDMA path with something similar to:
commit 0ccd76d4c236 ("omap_hsmmc: Implement scatter-gather
emulation")
What it does is loop over the sglist and smatter out one DMA
transfer per sg index.
It's likely faster than copying back and forth to a bounce
buffer even if there is a deal of HW talk back and forth.
(OTOH ... SPI is slow compared to rest of the system, right? Where does the benefit come from?)
I do not think you will see much performance improvement on an SPI-based host. Pierre just vaguely remembered "some Ricoh controllers" would get a benefit from bounce buffers, no specifics, sorry... Yours, Linus Walleij -- To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to majordomo@kvack.org. For more info on Linux MM, see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ . Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@kvack.org"> email@kvack.org </a>