use of dma_direct_set_offset in (allwinner) drivers

Linux 5.10-rc1 switched from having a single dma offset in struct device to a set of DMA ranges, and introduced a new helper to set them, dma_direct_set_offset.

This in fact surfaced that a bunch of drivers that violate our layering and set the offset from drivers, which meant we had to reluctantly export the symbol to set up the DMA range.

The drivers are:

drivers/gpu/drm/sun4i/sun4i_backend.c

This just use dma_direct_set_offset as a fallback. Is there any good reason to not just kill off the fallback?

drivers/media/platform/sunxi/sun4i-csi/sun4i_csi.c

Same as above.

drivers/media/platform/sunxi/sun6i-csi/sun6i_csi.c

This driver unconditionally sets the offset. Why can't we do this in the device tree?

drivers/staging/media/sunxi/cedrus/cedrus_hw.c

Same as above.

Hi Christoph,

Quoted 10 lines · Christoph Hellwig

Linux 5.10-rc1 switched from having a single dma offset in struct device to a set of DMA ranges, and introduced a new helper to set them, dma_direct_set_offset.

This in fact surfaced that a bunch of drivers that violate our layering and set the offset from drivers, which meant we had to reluctantly export the symbol to set up the DMA range.

The drivers are:

Quoted 8 lines

drivers/gpu/drm/sun4i/sun4i_backend.c

This just use dma_direct_set_offset as a fallback. Is there any good reason to not just kill off the fallback?

drivers/media/platform/sunxi/sun4i-csi/sun4i_csi.c

Same as above.

So, the history of this is:

- We initially introduced the support for those two controllers assuming that there was a direct mapping between the physical and DMA addresses. It turns out it didn't and the DMA accesses were going through a secondary, dedicated, bus that didn't have the same mapping of the RAM than the CPU.

4690803b09c6 ("drm/sun4i: backend: Offset layer buffer address by DRAM starting address")

- This dedicated bus is undocumented and barely used in the vendor kernel so this was overlooked, and it's fairly hard to get infos on it for all the SoCs we support. We added the DT support for it though on some SoCs we had enough infos to do so:

c43a4469402f ("dt-bindings: interconnect: Add a dma interconnect name") 22f88e311399 ("ARM: dts: sun5i: Add the MBUS controller")

This explains the check on the interconnect property

- However, due to the stable DT rule, we still need to operate without regressions on older DTs that wouldn't have that property (and for SoCs we haven't figured out). Hence the fallback.

Quoted 9 lines

drivers/media/platform/sunxi/sun6i-csi/sun6i_csi.c

This driver unconditionally sets the offset. Why can't we do this in the device tree?

drivers/staging/media/sunxi/cedrus/cedrus_hw.c

Same as above.

We should make those two match the previous ones, but we'll have the same issue here eventually. Most likely they were never ran on an SoC for which we have the MBUS figured out.

Maxime

_______________________________________________
linux-arm-kernel mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel

How about having something in the platform code that keys off the top-level SoC compatible and uses a bus notifier to create offsets for the relevant devices if an MBUS description is missing? At least that way the workaround could be confined to a single dedicated place and look somewhat similar to other special cases like sta2x11, rather than being duplicated all over the place.

Quoted 37 lines · Maxime Ripard

Hi Christoph,

Quoted 10 lines · Christoph Hellwig

Linux 5.10-rc1 switched from having a single dma offset in struct device to a set of DMA ranges, and introduced a new helper to set them, dma_direct_set_offset.

This in fact surfaced that a bunch of drivers that violate our layering and set the offset from drivers, which meant we had to reluctantly export the symbol to set up the DMA range.

The drivers are:

Quoted 8 lines

drivers/gpu/drm/sun4i/sun4i_backend.c

This just use dma_direct_set_offset as a fallback. Is there any good reason to not just kill off the fallback?

drivers/media/platform/sunxi/sun4i-csi/sun4i_csi.c

Same as above.

So, the history of this is:

- We initially introduced the support for those two controllers assuming that there was a direct mapping between the physical and DMA addresses. It turns out it didn't and the DMA accesses were going through a secondary, dedicated, bus that didn't have the same mapping of the RAM than the CPU.

4690803b09c6 ("drm/sun4i: backend: Offset layer buffer address by DRAM starting address")

- This dedicated bus is undocumented and barely used in the vendor kernel so this was overlooked, and it's fairly hard to get infos on it for all the SoCs we support. We added the DT support for it though on some SoCs we had enough infos to do so:

Quoted 8 lines

c43a4469402f ("dt-bindings: interconnect: Add a dma interconnect name") 22f88e311399 ("ARM: dts: sun5i: Add the MBUS controller")

This explains the check on the interconnect property

- However, due to the stable DT rule, we still need to operate without regressions on older DTs that wouldn't have that property (and for SoCs we haven't figured out). Hence the fallback.

How about having something in the platform code that keys off the top-level SoC compatible and uses a bus notifier to create offsets for the relevant devices if an MBUS description is missing? At least that way the workaround could be confined to a single dedicated place and look somewhat similar to other special cases like sta2x11, rather than being duplicated all over the place.