lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2018]   [Sep]   [5]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH 2/2] thunderbolt: Initialize after IOMMUs
On Wed, Sep 05, 2018 at 10:47:46AM +0200, Lukas Wunner wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 03, 2018 at 04:20:12PM +0300, Mika Westerberg wrote:
> > If IOMMU is enabled and Thunderbolt driver is built into the kernel
> > image, it will be probed before IOMMUs are attached to the PCI bus.
> > Because of this DMA mappings the driver does will not go through IOMMU
> > and start failing right after IOMMUs are enabled.
> >
> > For this reason move the Thunderbolt driver initialization happen at
> > rootfs level.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Mika Westerberg <mika.westerberg@linux.intel.com>
> > ---
> > drivers/thunderbolt/nhi.c | 2 +-
> > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/thunderbolt/nhi.c b/drivers/thunderbolt/nhi.c
> > index 88cff05a1808..5cd6bdfa068f 100644
> > --- a/drivers/thunderbolt/nhi.c
> > +++ b/drivers/thunderbolt/nhi.c
> > @@ -1191,5 +1191,5 @@ static void __exit nhi_unload(void)
> > tb_domain_exit();
> > }
> >
> > -fs_initcall(nhi_init);
> > +rootfs_initcall(nhi_init);
> > module_exit(nhi_unload);
>
> What if the rootfs is located on a Thunderbolt-attached drive and
> the thunderbolt driver needs to establish tunnels to that drive
> before rootfs can be accessed? Doesn't the above break such a setup?

No, then you put the driver as part of your initrd.

> I think the dependency on the IOMMU should be open coded by returning
> -EPROBE_DEFER from the ->probe hook if it's not yet attached.
> Shuffling around initcall order is just applying duct tape.

It is not a dependency. The same thing can happen with any other driver
if they happen to initialize any DMA with the device before IOMMUs are
initialized.

> Commit acb40d841257 already changed module_init() to fs_initcall()
> and now it has to be changed again. Shows how fragile this is.

It is a bit fragile but I don't see any other way to handle this than
trusting on the link ordering. Both -EPROBE_DEFER and device_links are
out of the question AFAICT.

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2018-09-05 11:46    [W:0.097 / U:4.536 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site