Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751351AbaLELLi (ORCPT ); Fri, 5 Dec 2014 06:11:38 -0500 Received: from gw-1.arm.linux.org.uk ([78.32.30.217]:39035 "EHLO pandora.arm.linux.org.uk" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751138AbaLELLg (ORCPT ); Fri, 5 Dec 2014 06:11:36 -0500 Date: Fri, 5 Dec 2014 11:11:14 +0000 From: Russell King - ARM Linux To: Arnd Bergmann Cc: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, Arend van Spriel , linux-wireless , "brcm80211-dev-list@broadcom.com" , David Miller , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" Subject: Re: using DMA-API on ARM Message-ID: <20141205111114.GQ11285@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk> References: <5481794E.4050406@broadcom.com> <4565667.WCBuNmaazQ@wuerfel> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <4565667.WCBuNmaazQ@wuerfel> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.23 (2014-03-12) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Fri, Dec 05, 2014 at 10:52:02AM +0100, Arnd Bergmann wrote: > I'm still puzzled why you'd need a single dma_sync_single_for_cpu() > after dma_alloc_coherent though, you should not need any. Is it possible > that the driver accidentally uses __raw_readl() instead of readl() > in some places and you are just lacking an appropriate barrier? Digging into the driver, it looks like individual DMA buffers are allocated (via brcmf_pcie_init_dmabuffer_for_device) and registered into a "commonring" layer. Whenever the buffer is written to, space is first allocated via a call to brcmf_commonring_reserve_for_write() or brcmf_commonring_reserve_for_write_multiple(), data written to the buffer, followed by a call to brcmf_commonring_write_complete(). brcmf_commonring_write_complete() calls two methods at that point: cr_write_wptr() and cr_ring_bell(), which will be brcmf_pcie_ring_mb_write_wptr() and brcmf_pcie_ring_mb_ring_bell(). The first calls brcmf_pcie_write_tcm16(), which uses iowrite16(), which contains the appropriate barrier. The bell ringing functions also use ioread*/iowrite*(). So, on the write side, it looks fine from the barrier perspective. On the read side, brcmf_commonring_get_read_ptr() is used before a read access to the ring - which calls the cr_update_wptr() method, which in turn uses an ioread16() call. After the CPU has read data from the ring, brcmf_commonring_read_complete() is used, which uses iowrite16(). So, I don't see a barrier problem on the read side. However, I did trip over this: static void * brcmf_pcie_init_dmabuffer_for_device(struct brcmf_pciedev_info *devinfo, u32 size, u32 tcm_dma_phys_addr, dma_addr_t *dma_handle) { void *ring; long long address; ring = dma_alloc_coherent(&devinfo->pdev->dev, size, dma_handle, GFP_KERNEL); if (!ring) return NULL; address = (long long)(long)*dma_handle; Casting to (long) will truncate the DMA handle to 32-bits on a 32-bit architecture, even if it supports 64-bit DMA addresses. There's a couple of other places where this same truncation occurs: address = (long long)(long)devinfo->shared.scratch_dmahandle; and address = (long long)(long)devinfo->shared.ringupd_dmahandle; In any case, wouldn't using a u64 type for "address" be better - isn't "long long" 128-bit on 64-bit architectures? -- FTTC broadband for 0.8mile line: currently at 9.5Mbps down 400kbps up according to speedtest.net. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/