lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2010]   [May]   [11]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [alsa-devel] USB transfer_buffer allocations on 64bit systems
On Tue, 11 May 2010, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk wrote:

> > > > Either the data isn't getting written to the buffer correctly or else
> > > > the buffer isn't getting sent to the device correctly. Can anybody
> > > > suggest a means of determining which is the case?
> > >
> > > I can't say anything about this log that including only DMA addresses.
> > > I'm not familiar with how the USB core does DMA stuff. And the USB
> > > stack design that the USB core does DMA stuff (allocating, mappings,
> > > etc) makes debugging DMA issues really difficult.
> >
> > The DMA stuff is simple enough in this case. The urb->transfer_buffer
> > address is passed to dma_map_single(), and the DMA address it returns
> > is stored in urb->transfer_dma. Those are the two values printed out
> > by the debugging patch.
>
> Is that address (urb->transfer_dma) the same as
'virt_to_phys(urb->transfer_buffer)'

I don't know. We didn't print out the value of
virt_to_phys(urb->transfer_buffer). All I can say is that
urb->transfer_dma is the value returned by dma_map_single().

> (if not, then SWIOTLB is being utilized) and is the dma_sync_* done on the
> urb->transfer_dma (to properly sync the data from the SWIOTLB to the
> transfer_buffer) before you start using the urb->transfer_buffer?

There are no calls to any dma_sync_* routines. Daniel will have to
check me on this, but I believe that urb->transfer_buffer is filled
before dma_map_single() is called and it isn't touched again until
after dma_unmap_single() (which occurs before urb's completion handler
is called).

Alan Stern



\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2010-05-12 10:15    [W:0.201 / U:0.064 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site