On 04-12-19, 13:47, Peter Ujfalusi wrote:
> Hi Sascha,
>
> On 03/12/2019 13.50, Sascha Hauer wrote:
> > Hi All,
> >
> > vc->desc_free() used to be called in non atomic context which makes
> > sense to me. This changed over time and now vc->desc_free() is sometimes
> > called in atomic context and sometimes not.
> >
> > The story starts with 13bb26ae8850 ("dmaengine: virt-dma: don't always
> > free descriptor upon completion"). This introduced a vc->desc_allocated
> > list which is mostly handled with the lock held, except in vchan_complete().
> > vchan_complete() moves the completed descs onto a separate list for the sake
> > of iterating over that list without the lock held allowing to call
> > vc->desc_free() without lock. 13bb26ae8850 changes this to:
> >
> > @@ -83,8 +110,10 @@ static void vchan_complete(unsigned long arg)
> > cb_data = vd->tx.callback_param;
> >
> > list_del(&vd->node);
> > -
> > - vc->desc_free(vd);
> > + if (dmaengine_desc_test_reuse(&vd->tx))
> > + list_add(&vd->node, &vc->desc_allocated);
> > + else
> > + vc->desc_free(vd);
> >
> > vc->desc_free() is still called without lock, but the list operation is done
> > without locking as well which is wrong.
>
> Hrm, yes all list operation against desc_* should be protected by the
> lock, it is a miss.
>
> > Now with 6af149d2b142 ("dmaengine: virt-dma: Add helper to free/reuse a
> > descriptor") the hunk above was moved to a separate function
> > (vchan_vdesc_fini()). With 1c7f072d94e8 ("dmaengine: virt-dma: Support for
> > race free transfer termination") the helper is started to be called with
> > lock held resulting in vc->desc_free() being called under the lock as
> > well. It is still called from vchan_complete() without lock.
>
> Right.
> I think the most elegant way to fix this would be to introduce a new
> list_head in virt_dma_chan, let's name it desc_terminated.
>
> We would add the descriptor to this within vchan_terminate_vdesc() (lock
> is held).
> In vchan_synchronize() we would
> list_splice_tail_init(&vc->desc_terminated, &head);
> with the lock held and outside of the lock we free them up.
>
> So we would put the terminated descs to the new list and free them up in
> synchronize.
>
> This way the vchan_vdesc_fini() would be only called without the lock held.
This makes sense to me as well. I would like the vc->desc_free() to be
always called with lock and in non-atomic context.
>
> > I think vc->desc_free() being called under a spin_lock is unfortunate as
> > the i.MX SDMA driver does a dma_free_coherent() there which is required
> > to be called with interrupts enabled.
>
> In the in review k3-udma driver I use dma_pool or dma_alloc_coherent in
> mixed mode depending on the type of the channel.
>
> I did also see the same issue and what I ended up doing is to have
> desc_to_purge list and udma_purge_desc_work()
> in udma_desc_free() if the descriptor is from the dma_pool, I free it
> right away, if it needs dma_free_coherent() then I put it to the
> desc_to_purge list and schedule the purge worker to deal with them at a
> later time.
>
> In this driver I don't use vchan_terminate_vdesc() because of this.
>
> > I am not sure where to go from here hence I'm writing this mail. Do we
> > agree that vc->desc_free() should be called without lock?
>
> I think it should be called without the lock held.
>
> >
> > Sascha
> >
> >
>
> - Péter
>
> Texas Instruments Finland Oy, Porkkalankatu 22, 00180 Helsinki.
> Y-tunnus/Business ID: 0615521-4. Kotipaikka/Domicile: Helsinki
--
~Vinod
