I have tested this patch on my MPC8548 machine box, kernel version is
2.6.30. There is a problem.
#mdadm -C /dev/md0 -l5 -n3 /dev/sd{a,b,c}
Recovery can be done successfully, interrupts looks normal.
# cat /proc/interrupts
CPU0
16: 16091057 OpenPIC Level mvSata
17: 0 OpenPIC Level mvSata
18: 4 OpenPIC Level phy_interrupt, phy_interrupt
20: 39 OpenPIC Level fsldma-channel
21: 0 OpenPIC Level fsldma-channel
22: 0 OpenPIC Level fsldma-channel
23: 0 OpenPIC Level fsldma-channel
29: 241 OpenPIC Level eth0_tx
30: 1004692 OpenPIC Level eth0_rx
34: 0 OpenPIC Level eth0_er
35: 0 OpenPIC Level eth1_tx
36: 0 OpenPIC Level eth1_rx
40: 0 OpenPIC Level eth1_er
42: 73060 OpenPIC Level serial
43: 9854 OpenPIC Level i2c-mpc, i2c-mpc
45: 61264188 OpenPIC Level talitos
BAD: 0
Then, I plan to create a VG, but problem occured.
#pvcreate /dev/md0
After I input this command, system hangs there without any messages.
BTW, all is OK before using this patch.
2009/10/30 Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@xxxxxxxxx>:
> On Wed, Oct 14, 2009 at 11:41 PM, Vishnu Suresh <Vishnu@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> [..]
>> diff --git a/drivers/crypto/Kconfig b/drivers/crypto/Kconfig
>> index b08403d..343e578 100644
>> --- a/drivers/crypto/Kconfig
>> +++ b/drivers/crypto/Kconfig
>> @@ -192,6 +192,8 @@ config CRYPTO_DEV_TALITOS
>> select CRYPTO_ALGAPI
>> select CRYPTO_AUTHENC
>> select HW_RANDOM
>> + select DMA_ENGINE
>> + select ASYNC_XOR
>
> You need only select DMA_ENGINE. ASYNC_XOR is selected by its users.
>
>> depends on FSL_SOC
>> help
>> Say 'Y' here to use the Freescale Security Engine (SEC)
>> diff --git a/drivers/crypto/talitos.c b/drivers/crypto/talitos.c
>> index c47ffe8..84819d4 100644
>> --- a/drivers/crypto/talitos.c
>> +++ b/drivers/crypto/talitos.c
> [..]
>> +static void talitos_process_pending(struct talitos_xor_chan *xor_chan)
>> +{
>> + struct talitos_xor_desc *desc, *_desc;
>> + unsigned long flags;
>> + int status;
>> +
>> + spin_lock_irqsave(&xor_chan->desc_lock, flags);
>> +
>> + list_for_each_entry_safe(desc, _desc, &xor_chan->pending_q, node) {
>> + status = talitos_submit(xor_chan->dev, &desc->hwdesc,
>> + talitos_release_xor, desc);
>> + if (status != -EINPROGRESS)
>> + break;
>> +
>> + list_del(&desc->node);
>> + list_add_tail(&desc->node, &xor_chan->in_progress_q);
>> + }
>> +
>> + spin_unlock_irqrestore(&xor_chan->desc_lock, flags);
>> +}
>
> The driver uses spin_lock_bh everywhere else which is either a bug, or
> this code is being overly protective. In any event lockdep will
> rightly complain about this. The API and its users do not submit
> operations in hard-irq context.
>
>> +
>> +static void talitos_release_xor(struct device *dev, struct talitos_desc *hwdesc,
>> + void *context, int error)
>> +{
>> + struct talitos_xor_desc *desc = context;
>> + struct talitos_xor_chan *xor_chan;
>> + dma_async_tx_callback callback;
>> + void *callback_param;
>> +
>> + if (unlikely(error)) {
>> + dev_err(dev, "xor operation: talitos error %d\n", error);
>> + BUG();
>> + }
>> +
>> + xor_chan = container_of(desc->async_tx.chan, struct talitos_xor_chan,
>> + common);
>> + spin_lock_bh(&xor_chan->desc_lock);
>> + if (xor_chan->completed_cookie < desc->async_tx.cookie)
>> + xor_chan->completed_cookie = desc->async_tx.cookie;
>> +
>> + callback = desc->async_tx.callback;
>> + callback_param = desc->async_tx.callback_param;
>> +
>> + if (callback) {
>> + spin_unlock_bh(&xor_chan->desc_lock);
>> + callback(callback_param);
>> + spin_lock_bh(&xor_chan->desc_lock);
>> + }
>
> You do not need to unlock to call the callback. Users of the API
> assume that they are called in bh context and that they are not
> allowed to submit new operations directly from the callback (this
> simplifies the descriptor cleanup routines in other drivers).
>
>> +
>> + list_del(&desc->node);
>> + list_add_tail(&desc->node, &xor_chan->free_desc);
>> + spin_unlock_bh(&xor_chan->desc_lock);
>> + if (!list_empty(&xor_chan->pending_q))
>> + talitos_process_pending(xor_chan);
>> +}
>
> It appears this routine is missing a call to dma_run_dependencies()?
> This is needed if another channel is handling memory copy offload. I
> assume this is the case due to your other patch to fsldma. See
> iop_adma_run_tx_complete_actions(). If this xor resource can also
> handle copy operations that would be more efficient as it eliminates
> channel switching. See the ioatdma driver and its use of
> ASYNC_TX_DISABLE_CHANNEL_SWITCH.
>
>> +static struct dma_async_tx_descriptor * talitos_prep_dma_xor(
>> + struct dma_chan *chan, dma_addr_t dest, dma_addr_t *src,
>> + unsigned int src_cnt, size_t len, unsigned long flags)
>> +{
>> + struct talitos_xor_chan *xor_chan;
>> + struct talitos_xor_desc *new;
>> + struct talitos_desc *desc;
>> + int i, j;
>> +
>> + BUG_ON(unlikely(len > TALITOS_MAX_DATA_LEN));
>> +
>> + xor_chan = container_of(chan, struct talitos_xor_chan, common);
>> +
>> + spin_lock_bh(&xor_chan->desc_lock);
>> + if (!list_empty(&xor_chan->free_desc)) {
>> + new = container_of(xor_chan->free_desc.next,
>> + struct talitos_xor_desc, node);
>> + list_del(&new->node);
>> + } else {
>> + new = talitos_xor_alloc_descriptor(xor_chan, GFP_KERNEL);
>> + }
>> + spin_unlock_bh(&xor_chan->desc_lock);
>> +
>> + if (!new) {
>> + dev_err(xor_chan->common.device->dev,
>> + "No free memory for XOR DMA descriptor\n");
>> + return NULL;
>> + }
>> + dma_async_tx_descriptor_init(&new->async_tx, &xor_chan->common);
>> +
>> + INIT_LIST_HEAD(&new->node);
>> + INIT_LIST_HEAD(&new->tx_list);
>
> You can save some overhead in the fast path by moving this
> initialization to talitos_xor_alloc_descriptor.
>
>> +
>> + desc = &new->hwdesc;
>> + /* Set destination: Last pointer pair */
>> + to_talitos_ptr(&desc->ptr[6], dest);
>> + desc->ptr[6].len = cpu_to_be16(len);
>> + desc->ptr[6].j_extent = 0;
>> +
>> + /* Set Sources: End loading from second-last pointer pair */
>> + for (i = 5, j = 0; (j < src_cnt) && (i > 0); i--, j++) {
>> + to_talitos_ptr(&desc->ptr[i], src[j]);
>> + desc->ptr[i].len = cpu_to_be16(len);
>> + desc->ptr[i].j_extent = 0;
>> + }
>> +
>> + /*
>> + * documentation states first 0 ptr/len combo marks end of sources
>> + * yet device produces scatter boundary error unless all subsequent
>> + * sources are zeroed out
>> + */
>> + for (; i >= 0; i--) {
>> + to_talitos_ptr(&desc->ptr[i], 0);
>> + desc->ptr[i].len = 0;
>> + desc->ptr[i].j_extent = 0;
>> + }
>> +
>> + desc->hdr = DESC_HDR_SEL0_AESU | DESC_HDR_MODE0_AESU_XOR
>> + | DESC_HDR_TYPE_RAID_XOR;
>> +
>> + new->async_tx.parent = NULL;
>> + new->async_tx.next = NULL;
>
> These fields are managed by the async_tx channel switch code. No need
> to manage it here.
>
>> + new->async_tx.cookie = 0;
>
> This is set below to -EBUSY, it's redundant to touch it here.
>
>> + async_tx_ack(&new->async_tx);
>
> This makes it impossible to attach a dependency to this operation.
> Not sure this is what you want.
>
> --
> Dan
> --
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-raid" in
> the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
>
--
The simplest is not all best but the best is surely the simplest!
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-crypto" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
