On 30.01.25 06:27, Harshvardhan Jha wrote:
On 30/01/25 3:31 AM, Stefano Stabellini wrote:On Wed, 29 Jan 2025, Jürgen Groß wrote:On 29.01.25 19:35, Harshvardhan Jha wrote:On 29/01/25 4:52 PM, Juergen Gross wrote:On 29.01.25 10:15, Harshvardhan Jha wrote:On 29/01/25 2:34 PM, Greg KH wrote:On Wed, Jan 29, 2025 at 02:29:48PM +0530, Harshvardhan Jha wrote:Hi Greg, On 29/01/25 2:18 PM, Greg KH wrote:On Wed, Jan 29, 2025 at 02:13:34PM +0530, Harshvardhan Jha wrote:Hi there, On 29/01/25 2:05 PM, Greg KH wrote:On Wed, Jan 29, 2025 at 02:03:51PM +0530, Harshvardhan Jha wrote:Hi All, +stable There seems to be some formatting issues in my log output. I have attached it as a file.Confused, what are you wanting us to do here in the stable tree? thanks, greg k-hSince, this is reproducible on 5.4.y I have added stable. The culprit commit which upon getting reverted fixes this issue is also present in 5.4.y stable.What culprit commit? I see no information here :( Remember, top-posting is evil...My apologies, The stable tag v5.4.289 seems to fail to boot with the following prompt in an infinite loop: [ 24.427217] megaraid_sas 0000:65:00.0: megasas_build_io_fusion 3273 sge_count (-12) is out of range. Range is: 0-256 Reverting the following patch seems to fix the issue: stable-5.4 : v5.4.285 - 5df29a445f3a xen/swiotlb: add alignment check for dma buffers I tried changing swiotlb grub command line arguments but that didn't seem to help much unfortunately and the error was seen again.Ok, can you submit this revert with the information about why it should not be included in the 5.4.y tree and cc: everyone involved and then we will be glad to queue it up. thanks, greg k-hThis might be reproducible on other stable trees and mainline as well so we will get it fixed there and I will submit the necessary fix to stable when everything is sorted out on mainline.Right. Just reverting my patch will trade one error with another one (the one which triggered me to write the patch). There are two possible ways to fix the issue: - allow larger DMA buffers in xen/swiotlb (today 2MB are the max. supported size, the megaraid_sas driver seems to effectively request 4MB)This seems relatively simpler to implement but I'm not sure whether it's the most optimal approachJust making the static array larger used to hold the frame numbers for the buffer seems to be a waste of memory for most configurations. I'm thinking of an allocated array using the max needed size (replace a former buffer with a larger one if needed).You are referring to discontig_frames and MAX_CONTIG_ORDER in arch/x86/xen/mmu_pv.c, right? I am not super familiar with that code but it looks like a good way to go.This rejected patch works on MAX_CONTIG_ORDER and doubles the buffer size but that is undesirable in most situations: https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/28947d4f-ab32-4a57-8dbb-e37fa4183a69@xxxxxxxx/t/ What needs to be done is the buffer size will only be doubled when needed.
I'll write a patch. Juergen
Attachment:
OpenPGP_0xB0DE9DD628BF132F.asc
Description: OpenPGP public key
Attachment:
OpenPGP_signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature