Messages in this thread | | | Date | Tue, 15 May 2012 10:01:41 -0700 | From | Nishanth Aravamudan <> | Subject | ibmveth bug? |
| |
Hi Santiago,
Are you still working on ibmveth?
I've found a very sporadic bug with ibmveth in some testing. PAPR requires that:
"Validate the Buffer Descriptor of the receive queue buffer (I/O addresses for entire buffer length starting at the spec- ified I/O address are translated by the RTCE table, length is a multiple of 16 bytes, and alignment is on a 16 byte boundary) else H_Parameter."
but from what I can tell ibmveth.c is not enforcing this last condition:
adapter->rx_queue.queue_addr = kmalloc(adapter->rx_queue.queue_len, GFP_KERNEL);
...
adapter->rx_queue.queue_dma = dma_map_single(dev, adapter->rx_queue.queue_addr, adapter->rx_queue.queue_len, DMA_BIDIRECTIONAL);
...
rxq_desc.fields.address = adapter->rx_queue.queue_dma;
...
lpar_rc = ibmveth_register_logical_lan(adapter, rxq_desc, mac_address); netdev_err(netdev, "buffer TCE:0x%llx filter TCE:0x%llx rxq " "desc:0x%llx MAC:0x%llx\n", adapter->buffer_list_dma, adapter->filter_list_dma, rxq_desc.desc, mac_address);
And I got on one install attempt:
[ 39.978430] ibmveth 30000004: eth0: h_register_logical_lan failed with -4 [ 39.978449] ibmveth 30000004: eth0: buffer TCE:0x1000 filter TCE:0x10000 rxq desc:0x80006010000200a8 MAC:0x56754de8e904
rxq desc, as you can see is not 16byte aligned. kmalloc() only guarantees 8-byte alignment (as does gcc, I think). Initially, I thought we could just overallocate the queue_addr and ALIGN() down, but then we would need to save the original kmalloc pointer in a new struct member per rx_queue.
So a couple of questions:
1) Is my analysis accurate? :)
2) How gross would it be to save an extra pointer for every rx_queue?
3) Based upon 2), is it better to just go ahead and create our own kmem_cache (which gets an alignment specified)?
For 3), I started coding this, but couldn't find a clean place to allocate the kmem_cache itself, as the size of each object depends on the run-time characteristics (afaict), but needs to be specified at cache creation time. Any insight you could provide would be great!
Thanks, Nish -- Nishanth Aravamudan <nacc@us.ibm.com> IBM Linux Technology Center
| |