Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel+bounces-89137-linux.lists.archive=gmail.com@vger.kernel.org designates 2604:1380:45d1:ec00::1 as permitted sender) client-ip=2604:1380:45d1:ec00::1;
Precedence: bulk
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <CA+G9fYtddf2Fd3be+YShHP6CmSDNcn0ptW8qg+stUKW+Cn0rjQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <d5c07950-6f42-4ac9-b0d8-776d444252ae@app.fastmail.com> <CAPLW+4=T1eGrWQcEJWvOcHgq9tnRhfi=AH_=qj1022k2WHmEhA@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAPLW+4=T1eGrWQcEJWvOcHgq9tnRhfi=AH_=qj1022k2WHmEhA@mail.gmail.com>
From: Sam Protsenko <semen.protsenko@linaro.org>
Date: Fri, 1 Mar 2024 15:18:46 -0600
Message-ID: <CAPLW+4mVTvPBW0hd9pV6AsSezxPAhwPByq3WmGpprtseTgy-wg@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: WinLink E850-96: WARNING: at block/blk-settings.c:204 blk_validate_limits
To: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
Cc: Naresh Kamboju <naresh.kamboju@linaro.org>, linux-block <linux-block@vger.kernel.org>, 
	lkft-triage@lists.linaro.org, open list <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>, 
	Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk>, Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>, Christian Brauner <brauner@kernel.org>, 
	Ulf Hansson <ulf.hansson@linaro.org>, Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@linaro.org>, 
	Anders Roxell <anders.roxell@linaro.org>, Jaehoon Chung <jh80.chung@samsung.com>, 
	linux-mmc@vger.kernel.org
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On Fri, Mar 1, 2024 at 2:51=E2=80=AFPM Sam Protsenko <semen.protsenko@linar=
o.org> wrote:
>
> On Thu, Feb 29, 2024 at 8:56=E2=80=AFAM Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de> wro=
te:
> >
> > On Thu, Feb 29, 2024, at 15:14, Naresh Kamboju wrote:
> > > The arm64 WinLink E850-96 Board boot failed with 16K and 64K page siz=
e builds
> > > Please find the below warning log on Linux next-20240229.
> > > First noticed on the next-20240220 tag.
> > >
> > > This issue arises only when one of these Kconfig options is enabled.
> > >   CONFIG_ARM64_16K_PAGES=3Dy
> > >   CONFIG_ARM64_64K_PAGES=3Dy
> > >
> > > Reported-by: Linux Kernel Functional Testing <lkft@linaro.org>
> > >
> > > Warning log:
> > > -------
> > > [    2.231008] mmc_host mmc0: Bus speed (slot 0) =3D 49968750Hz (slot
> > > req 52000000Hz, actual 49968750HZ div =3D 0)
> > > [    2.231714] mmc_host mmc0: Bus speed (slot 0) =3D 399750000Hz (slo=
t
> > > req 200000000Hz, actual 199875000HZ div =3D 1)
> > > [    2.241961] mmc0: new HS400 Enhanced strobe MMC card at address 00=
01
> > > [    2.249182] ------------[ cut here ]------------
> > > [    2.252371] WARNING: CPU: 3 PID: 90 at block/blk-settings.c:204
> > > blk_validate_limits (block/blk-settings.c:204 (discriminator 1))
> >
> >
> > The warning was added with commit d690cb8ae14b ("block: add
> > an API to atomically update queue limits")
> >
> > +               if (!lim->max_segment_size)
> > +                       lim->max_segment_size =3D BLK_MAX_SEGMENT_SIZE;
> > +               if (WARN_ON_ONCE(lim->max_segment_size < PAGE_SIZE))
> > +                       return -EINVAL;
> >
> > Whereas mmc_alloc_disk sets the limit as
> >
> >         /*
> >          * Setting a virt_boundary implicity sets a max_segment_size, s=
o try
> >          * to set the hardware one here.
> >          */
> >         if (host->can_dma_map_merge) {
> >                 lim.virt_boundary_mask =3D dma_get_merge_boundary(mmc_d=
ev(host));
> >                 lim.max_segments =3D MMC_DMA_MAP_MERGE_SEGMENTS;
> >         } else {
> >                 lim.max_segment_size =3D
> >                         round_down(host->max_seg_size, lim.logical_bloc=
k_size);
> >                 lim.max_segments =3D host->max_segs;
> >         }
> >
> > and max_seg_size gets initialized to either one less
> > than 64k, or to exactly 4k in the dwmmc driver here:
> >
> >         /* Useful defaults if platform data is unset. */
> >         if (host->use_dma =3D=3D TRANS_MODE_IDMAC) {
> >                 mmc->max_segs =3D host->ring_size;
> >                 mmc->max_blk_size =3D 65535;
>
> Changing this value here to PAGE_SIZE (instead of 65535) makes E850-96
> functional again (tested with CONFIG_ARM64_16K_PAGES=3Dy). I'm sure this
> is just a quick hack, but maybe it can be helpful in further analysis.
> If anybody wants me to run some tests on E850-96 -- please let me
> know.
>

Sorry, just noticed I commented on the wrong line. Here is the change I mad=
e:

-               mmc->max_seg_size =3D 0x1000;
+               mmc->max_seg_size =3D PAGE_SIZE;

for (host->use_dma =3D=3D TRANS_MODE_IDMAC) case.

> [snip]