[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] Re: Regression when booting 5.15 as dom0 on arm64 (WAS: Re: [linux-linus test] 161829: regressions - FAIL)]
On Tue, 11 May 2021, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > On Mon, May 10, 2021 at 06:46:34PM -0700, Stefano Stabellini wrote: > > On Mon, 10 May 2021, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > > > On Sat, May 08, 2021 at 12:32:37AM +0100, Julien Grall wrote: > > > > The pointer dereferenced seems to suggest that the swiotlb hasn't been > > > > allocated. From what I can tell, this may be because swiotlb_force is > > > > set > > > > to SWIOTLB_NO_FORCE, we will still enable the swiotlb when running on > > > > top > > > > of Xen. > > > > > > > > I am not entirely sure what would be the correct fix. Any opinions? > > > > > > Can you try something like the patch below (not even compile tested, but > > > the intent should be obvious? > > > > > > > > > diff --git a/arch/arm64/mm/init.c b/arch/arm64/mm/init.c > > > index 16a2b2b1c54d..7671bc153fb1 100644 > > > --- a/arch/arm64/mm/init.c > > > +++ b/arch/arm64/mm/init.c > > > @@ -44,6 +44,8 @@ > > > #include <asm/tlb.h> > > > #include <asm/alternative.h> > > > > > > +#include <xen/arm/swiotlb-xen.h> > > > + > > > /* > > > * We need to be able to catch inadvertent references to memstart_addr > > > * that occur (potentially in generic code) before arm64_memblock_init() > > > @@ -482,7 +484,7 @@ void __init mem_init(void) > > > if (swiotlb_force == SWIOTLB_FORCE || > > > max_pfn > PFN_DOWN(arm64_dma_phys_limit)) > > > swiotlb_init(1); > > > - else > > > + else if (!IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_XEN) || !xen_swiotlb_detect()) > > > swiotlb_force = SWIOTLB_NO_FORCE; > > > > > > set_max_mapnr(max_pfn - PHYS_PFN_OFFSET); > > > > The "IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_XEN)" is not needed as the check is already part > > of xen_swiotlb_detect(). > > As far as I can tell the x86 version of xen_swiotlb_detect has a > !CONFIG_XEN stub. The arm/arm64 version in uncoditionally declared, but > the implementation only compiled when Xen support is enabled. The implementation of xen_swiotlb_detect should work fine if !CONFIG_XEN, but the issue is that it is implemented in arch/arm/xen/mm.c, so it is not going to be available. I think it would be good to turn it into a static inline so that we can call it from arch/arm64/mm/init.c and other similar places with or without CONFIG_XEN, see appended patch below. It compiles without CONFIG_XEN. > > But let me ask another question first. Do you think it makes sense to have: > > > > if (swiotlb_force == SWIOTLB_NO_FORCE) > > return 0; > > > > at the beginning of swiotlb_late_init_with_tbl? I am asking because > > swiotlb_late_init_with_tbl is meant for special late initializations, > > right? It shouldn't really matter the presence or absence of > > SWIOTLB_NO_FORCE in regards to swiotlb_late_init_with_tbl. Also the > > commit message for "swiotlb: Make SWIOTLB_NO_FORCE perform no > > allocation" says that "If a platform was somehow setting > > swiotlb_no_force and a later call to swiotlb_init() was to be made we > > would still be proceeding with allocating the default SWIOTLB size > > (64MB)." Our case here is very similar, right? So the allocation should > > proceed? > > Well, right now SWIOTLB_NO_FORCE is checked in dma_direct_map_page. > We need to clean all this up a bit, especially with the work to support > multiple swiotlb buffers, but I think for now this is the best we can > do. OK > > Which brings me to a separate unrelated issue, still affecting the path > > xen_swiotlb_init -> swiotlb_late_init_with_tbl. If swiotlb_init(1) is > > called by mem_init then swiotlb_late_init_with_tbl will fail due to the > > check: > > > > /* protect against double initialization */ > > if (WARN_ON_ONCE(io_tlb_default_mem)) > > return -ENOMEM; > > > > xen_swiotlb_init is meant to ask Xen to make a bunch of pages physically > > contiguous. Then, it initializes the swiotlb buffer based on those > > pages. So it is a problem that swiotlb_late_init_with_tbl refuses to > > continue. However, in practice it is not a problem today because on ARM > > we don't actually make any special requests to Xen to make the pages > > physically contiguous (yet). See the empty implementation of > > arch/arm/xen/mm.c:xen_create_contiguous_region. I don't know about x86. > > > > So maybe we should instead do something like the appended? > > So I'd like to change the core swiotlb initialization to just use > a callback into the arch/xen code to make the pages contigous and > kill all that code duplication. Together with the multiple swiotlb > buffer work I'd rather avoid churn that goes into a different direction > if possible. That's a much better plan. It is also not super urgent, so maybe for now we could add an explicit check for io_tlb_default_mem != NULL at the beginning of xen_swiotlb_init? So that at least we can fail explicitly or ignore it explicitly rather than by accident. --- diff --git a/arch/arm/xen/mm.c b/arch/arm/xen/mm.c index f8f07469d259..223b1151fd7d 100644 --- a/arch/arm/xen/mm.c +++ b/arch/arm/xen/mm.c @@ -135,18 +135,6 @@ void xen_destroy_contiguous_region(phys_addr_t pstart, unsigned int order) return; } -int xen_swiotlb_detect(void) -{ - if (!xen_domain()) - return 0; - if (xen_feature(XENFEAT_direct_mapped)) - return 1; - /* legacy case */ - if (!xen_feature(XENFEAT_not_direct_mapped) && xen_initial_domain()) - return 1; - return 0; -} - static int __init xen_mm_init(void) { struct gnttab_cache_flush cflush; diff --git a/arch/arm64/mm/init.c b/arch/arm64/mm/init.c index 16a2b2b1c54d..e55409caaee3 100644 --- a/arch/arm64/mm/init.c +++ b/arch/arm64/mm/init.c @@ -43,6 +43,7 @@ #include <linux/sizes.h> #include <asm/tlb.h> #include <asm/alternative.h> +#include <asm/xen/swiotlb-xen.h> /* * We need to be able to catch inadvertent references to memstart_addr @@ -482,7 +483,7 @@ void __init mem_init(void) if (swiotlb_force == SWIOTLB_FORCE || max_pfn > PFN_DOWN(arm64_dma_phys_limit)) swiotlb_init(1); - else + else if (!xen_swiotlb_detect()) swiotlb_force = SWIOTLB_NO_FORCE; set_max_mapnr(max_pfn - PHYS_PFN_OFFSET); diff --git a/include/xen/arm/swiotlb-xen.h b/include/xen/arm/swiotlb-xen.h index 2994fe6031a0..33336ab58afc 100644 --- a/include/xen/arm/swiotlb-xen.h +++ b/include/xen/arm/swiotlb-xen.h @@ -2,6 +2,19 @@ #ifndef _ASM_ARM_SWIOTLB_XEN_H #define _ASM_ARM_SWIOTLB_XEN_H -extern int xen_swiotlb_detect(void); +#include <xen/features.h> +#include <xen/xen.h> + +static inline int xen_swiotlb_detect(void) +{ + if (!xen_domain()) + return 0; + if (xen_feature(XENFEAT_direct_mapped)) + return 1; + /* legacy case */ + if (!xen_feature(XENFEAT_not_direct_mapped) && xen_initial_domain()) + return 1; + return 0; +} #endif /* _ASM_ARM_SWIOTLB_XEN_H */
|
Lists.xenproject.org is hosted with RackSpace, monitoring our |