https://github.com/torvalds/linux
Revision c5c9f25b98a568451d665afe4aeefe17bf9f2995 authored by Nishanth Aravamudan on 24 November 2015, 16:55:05 UTC, committed by Jens Axboe on 24 November 2015, 22:05:51 UTC
We received a bug report recently when DDW (64-bit direct DMA on Power)
is not enabled for NVMe devices. In that case, we fall back to 32-bit
DMA via the IOMMU, which is always done via 4K TCEs (Translation Control
Entries).

The NVMe device driver, though, assumes that the DMA alignment for the
PRP entries will match the device's page size, and that the DMA aligment
matches the kernel's page aligment. On Power, the the IOMMU page size,
as mentioned above, can be 4K, while the device can have a page size of
8K, while the kernel has a page size of 64K. This eventually trips the
BUG_ON in nvme_setup_prps(), as we have a 'dma_len' that is a multiple
of 4K but not 8K (e.g., 0xF000).

In this particular case of page sizes, we clearly want to use the
IOMMU's page size in the driver. And generally, the NVMe driver in this
function should be using the IOMMU's page size for the default device
page size, rather than the kernel's page size. There is not currently an
API to obtain the IOMMU's page size across all architectures and in the
interest of a stop-gap fix to this functional issue, default the NVMe
device page size to 4K, with the intent of adding such an API and
implementation across all architectures in the next merge window.

With the functionally equivalent v3 of this patch, our hardware test
exerciser survives when using 32-bit DMA; without the patch, the kernel
will BUG within a few minutes.

Signed-off-by: Nishanth Aravamudan <nacc at linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Signed-off-by: Jens Axboe <axboe@fb.com>
1 parent 6ffeba9
Raw File
Tip revision: c5c9f25b98a568451d665afe4aeefe17bf9f2995 authored by Nishanth Aravamudan on 24 November 2015, 16:55:05 UTC
NVMe: default to 4k device page size
Tip revision: c5c9f25
CodeOfConflict
Code of Conflict
----------------

The Linux kernel development effort is a very personal process compared
to "traditional" ways of developing software.  Your code and ideas
behind it will be carefully reviewed, often resulting in critique and
criticism.  The review will almost always require improvements to the
code before it can be included in the kernel.  Know that this happens
because everyone involved wants to see the best possible solution for
the overall success of Linux.  This development process has been proven
to create the most robust operating system kernel ever, and we do not
want to do anything to cause the quality of submission and eventual
result to ever decrease.

If however, anyone feels personally abused, threatened, or otherwise
uncomfortable due to this process, that is not acceptable.  If so,
please contact the Linux Foundation's Technical Advisory Board at
<tab@lists.linux-foundation.org>, or the individual members, and they
will work to resolve the issue to the best of their ability.  For more
information on who is on the Technical Advisory Board and what their
role is, please see:
	http://www.linuxfoundation.org/programs/advisory-councils/tab

As a reviewer of code, please strive to keep things civil and focused on
the technical issues involved.  We are all humans, and frustrations can
be high on both sides of the process.  Try to keep in mind the immortal
words of Bill and Ted, "Be excellent to each other."
back to top