Re: PROBLEM REMAINS: [sata_nv ADMA breaks ATAPI] Crash on accessing DVD-RAM

!MAILaRCHIVE_VOTE_RePLACE
Previous message: [thread] [date] [author]
Next message: [thread] [date] [author]
To: James Bottomley <James.Bottomley@...>
Cc: Alexander <aledin@...>, <linux-kernel@...>, ide <linux-ide@...>, Jeff Garzik <jeff@...>, Tejun Heo <htejun@...>
Date: Saturday, January 12, 2008 - 7:04 pm

James Bottomley wrote:

Just to give some background on what sata_nv is trying to do:

There are two sets of static DMA memory allocations that sata_nv does, 
the legacy ATA PRD and padding buffer which need to be in the lower 4GB, 
and the ADMA APRD and CPB areas which can be anywhere in 64-bit memory. 
With this patch, this is done by setting a 32-bit DMA mask before 
allocating the legacy areas and setting a 64-bit DMA mask before 
allocating the ADMA areas. Previously the driver just set a 64-bit mask 
before the legacy PRD got allocated so it could end up above 4GB, in 
which case legacy DMA couldn't possibly work. That part of the problem 
appears to be successfully fixed by the patch in question.

There's a further problem with runtime DMA mapping, however. Normally 
when ADMA is enabled the controller can reach anywhere in 64-bit memory. 
However, if an ATAPI device is connected, since ADMA doesn't work with 
ATAPI commands we have to switch it off on that port and use legacy DMA, 
which is limited to 32-bit. This is where the blk_queue_bounce_limit 
call comes in, it's trying to make the block layer bounce requests above 
4GB when legacy DMA is in use.

I don't think the problem is that there's some buffer which is getting 
allocated above 4GB and never bounced, since the problem goes away if 
ADMA is disabled entirely and the DMA mask remains 32-bit always. My 
guess is something is basing its decision on whether to bounce or not on 
the device DMA mask. That can't possibly work properly for sata_nv since 
the same PCI device has 2 ports, one of which can be in ADMA mode and 
64-bit capable and the other can be in legacy mode and only 32-bit capable.

Tejun, I believe you had a patch that was printing warnings when libata 
tried to program a legacy PRD with an address over 4GB. Could we change 
that to WARN_ON and get someone experiencing this to try it and
see what the stack trace points to?
--
Previous message: [thread] [date] [author]
Next message: [thread] [date] [author]

Messages in current thread:
Re: PROBLEM REMAINS: [sata_nv ADMA breaks ATAPI] Crash on ac..., Robert Hancock, (Sat Jan 12, 7:04 pm)