lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2010]   [May]   [12]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
SubjectRe: Rampant ext3/4 corruption on 2.6.34-rc7 with VIVT ARM (Marvell 88f5182)
From
Date
On Wed, 2010-05-12 at 23:21 +0100, Jamie Lokier wrote:
> Shilimkar, Santosh wrote:
> > There was a memory write barrier missing before the DMA descriptors
> > are handed over to DMA controller.
>
> On that note, are the cache flush functions implicit memory barriers?

(Adding Fujita on CC)

That's a very good question. The generic inline implementation of
dma_sync_* is:

static inline void dma_sync_single_for_cpu(struct device *dev, dma_addr_t addr,
size_t size,
enum dma_data_direction dir)
{
struct dma_map_ops *ops = get_dma_ops(dev);

BUG_ON(!valid_dma_direction(dir));
if (ops->sync_single_for_cpu)
ops->sync_single_for_cpu(dev, addr, size, dir);
debug_dma_sync_single_for_cpu(dev, addr, size, dir);
}

Which means that for coherent architectures that do not implement
the ops->sync_* hooks, we are probably missing a barrier here...

Thus if the above is expected to be a memory barrier, it's broken on
cache coherent powerpc for example. On non-coherent powerpc, we do cache
flushes and those are implicit barriers.

Now, in the case at hand, which is my ARM based NAS, I believe this
is non cache-coherent and thus uses cache flush ops. I don't know ARM
well enough but I would expect these to be implicit barriers. Russell ?
Nico ?

IE. You may have found a bug here though I don't know whether it's the
bug we are hitting right now :-)

Cheers,
Ben.




\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2010-05-13 00:51    [W:0.088 / U:14.496 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site