Re: [RFC PATCH powerpc] Fix a dma_mask issue of vio
From: Li Zhong <hidden>
Date: 2013-11-20 02:05:01
On Wed, 2013-11-20 at 12:28 +1100, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote:
On Tue, 2013-11-19 at 16:11 +0800, Li Zhong wrote:quoted
I encountered following issue: [ 0.283035] ibmvscsi 30000015: couldn't initialize event pool [ 5.688822] ibmvscsi: probe of 30000015 failed with error -1 which prevents the storage from being recognized, and the machine from booting. After some digging, it seems that it is caused by commit 4886c399da as dma_mask pointer in viodev->dev is not set, so in dma_set_mask_and_coherent(), dma_set_coherent_mask() is not called because dma_set_mask(), which is dma_set_mask_pSeriesLP() returned EIO. While before the commit, dma_set_coherent_mask() is always called. I tried to replace dma_set_mask_and_coherent() with dma_coerce_mask_and_coherent(), and the machine could boot again. But I'm not sure whether this is the correct fix...Russell, care to chime in ? I can't make sense of the semantics... The original commit was fairly clear: << Replace the following sequence: dma_set_mask(dev, mask); dma_set_coherent_mask(dev, mask); with a call to the new helper dma_set_mask_and_coherent().quoted
quoted
It all makes sense so far ... but doesn't work for some odd reason, and the "fix" uses a function whose name doesn't make much sense to me ... what is the difference between "setting" and "coercing" the mask ? And why doe replacing two "set" with a "set both" doesn't work and require a coerce ?
I think the difference is because the check of return value from
dma_set_mask in dma_coerce_mask_and_coherent():
--
int rc = dma_set_mask(dev, mask);
if (rc == 0)
dma_set_coherent_mask(dev, mask);
--
and in struct device {, dma_mask is a pointer, while coherent_dma_mask
is value (don't know why we have this difference).
And here for pseries, dma_set_mask() failed because the dma_mask pointer
still remains null.
And in dma_coerce_mask_and_coherent(), the dma_mask is set with the
address of coherent_dma_mask
--
dev->dma_mask = &dev->coherent_dma_mask;
--
Thanks, Zhong
I'm asking because I'm worried about breakage elsewhere... Cheers, Ben.quoted
--- arch/powerpc/kernel/vio.c | 2 +- 1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)diff --git a/arch/powerpc/kernel/vio.c b/arch/powerpc/kernel/vio.c index e7d0c88..76a6482 100644 --- a/arch/powerpc/kernel/vio.c +++ b/arch/powerpc/kernel/vio.c@@ -1419,7 +1419,7 @@ struct vio_dev *vio_register_device_node(struct device_node *of_node) /* needed to ensure proper operation of coherent allocations * later, in case driver doesn't set it explicitly */ - dma_set_mask_and_coherent(&viodev->dev, DMA_BIT_MASK(64)); + dma_coerce_mask_and_coherent(&viodev->dev, DMA_BIT_MASK(64)); } /* register with generic device framework */