Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1755134Ab0GGA6O (ORCPT ); Tue, 6 Jul 2010 20:58:14 -0400 Received: from mga03.intel.com ([143.182.124.21]:13164 "EHLO mga03.intel.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753535Ab0GGA6N (ORCPT ); Tue, 6 Jul 2010 20:58:13 -0400 X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.53,549,1272870000"; d="scan'208";a="297267014" Message-ID: <4C33D123.4080209@intel.com> Date: Tue, 06 Jul 2010 17:58:11 -0700 From: Dan Williams User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 6.1; en-US; rv:1.9.1.10) Gecko/20100512 Thunderbird/3.0.5 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Chris Li CC: David Woodhouse , linux-kernel , Matthew Wilcox Subject: Re: BUG in drivers/dma/ioat/dma_v2.c:314 References: <4C2A8879.8010000@intel.com> <4C2AC55E.3040303@intel.com> <1277923422.16256.8.camel@localhost> <4C2B9DAC.1030806@intel.com> <1277928125.18854.0.camel@localhost> <4C2BBACF.3080405@intel.com> <1277965264.18854.16.camel@localhost> <4C2C3B07.7050200@intel.com> <1277968336.4945.3.camel@localhost> <4C2C4319.6090906@intel.com> <1277972137.12558.2.camel@localhost> <4C2CCE67.6070600@intel.com> <1278324973.16975.68.camel@localhost> <1278463901.20082.34.camel@dwillia2-linux> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1373 Lines: 34 On 7/6/2010 5:51 PM, Chris Li wrote: > On Tue, Jul 6, 2010 at 5:51 PM, Dan Williams wrote: >> No, it should be PCI_DEVICE_ID_INTEL_IOAT_SNB (0x402f) for the dma >> engine at 00:0f.0 . PCI_DEVICE_ID_INTEL_ESB2_0 is the LPC controller at >> 00:1f.0, >> >>> That seems to be the reason preventing the warning to be print out. I am not >>> sure the warning should be always print out. Just curious why it did >>> not trigger. >> >> It should always trigger, and I have verified as much with the attached >> replacement patch (by forcing the error on a working system), but we run >> into a new problem. dma_pool_alloc() assumes that any dma_mapping error >> is transient. Do we need a new type of dma_mapping_error() that >> indicates permanent failure versus ENOMEM? The driver can handle the >> allocation failure, but it never gets the chance. > > Should I test your V2 patch instead? > It would confirm that we are catching the BIOS misconfiguration, but your system will get stuck in this loop. So just make sure you can get back to a working config, which it sounds like you can. -- Dan -- 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/