[lkml]   [2019]   [Jan]   [14]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: [PATCH] scsi: ufs: Consider device limitations for dma_mask
On Mon 14 Jan 09:36 PST 2019, Christoph Hellwig wrote:

> On Mon, Jan 14, 2019 at 09:30:51AM -0800, Bjorn Andersson wrote:
> > The problem here is that the capability bit states that the controller
> > itself claim to be able to deal with 64-bit addresses, which is probably
> > true. The thing that the struct device represents (the integrated
> > controller, on a bus in this SoC) doesn't.
> >
> > The device model accurately handles this and carries a dma_mask that's
> > appropriate for the device in this system - the capability is not.
> >
> > > You either need to introduce a quirk or a way to communicate the
> > > different limit so that it can be set by the core.
> >
> > The system's limit is already communicated in hba->dev->dma_mask, but
> > the ufshcd driver overwrites this. I expect that this would make sense
> > if the device model claims we can do e.g. 40 bit addressing, but the
> > 64-bit capability is not set in the controller - in which case ufshcd
> > would accurately lower this to 32-bits.
> No, that is absolutely not true. dev->dma_mask is set by the driver
> to what the driver based on the device specsheet/register claims to
> support. dev->bus_dma_mask contains any additional limits imposed
> by the bus/system, but that is handled transparently by the dma mapping
> code.

You're right and I see now that my bus_dma_mask is not set properly and
is the cause of the problem.

Thanks for correcting me, I fully agree with your NACK now.


 \ /
  Last update: 2019-01-14 21:24    [W:0.047 / U:1.192 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site