Re: issue with patch "x86: no CPA on iounmap"

From: Arjan van de Ven
Date: Tue Feb 05 2008 - 02:15:27 EST


Ingo Molnar wrote:
* Arjan van de Ven <arjan@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

Siddha, Suresh B wrote:
This is wrt to x86 git commit f56d005d30342a45d8af2b75ecccc82200f09600
"x86: no CPA on iounmap"

This can use performance issue. When a GART driver unmaps a RAM page,
thinking about this some more...

afaik the gart driver doesn't use ioremap....

(and it does caching control explicitly, and sets its pages back to cached)

there are many GART drivers, and the method used depends on the GART driver. The following GART drivers still use ioremap in one way or another:

drivers/char/agp/amd-k7-agp.c
drivers/char/agp/ati-agp.c
drivers/char/agp/generic.c
drivers/char/agp/sworks-agp.c
drivers/char/drm/radeon_cp.c

the method use is in all cases the same: they use __get_free_page() to pick up a general RAM page, they do SetPageReserved() and then they use ioremap_nocache() to map it non-cached, and then they also program the GART to access those pages.

when the GART code deinits, it does an iounmap() on those pages, unmaps it from the GART hardware itself, does a ClearPageReserved() and does __free_page() to put the page into the general page pool again. So Suresh is right: these pages are currently marked UC at this point and we need to mark them cacheable.

we could do this automatically in iounmap() upon seeing a page_is_ram() that has PageReserved set. Or we could stick in a set_memory_wb() into the deinit [and ioremap_nocache()-failure] sequence.

Since we treat PageReserved pages specially in ioremap() already [we allow them, despite them being listed in the e820 map], i think the more robust solution is to recognize them in iounmap() as well - this way it cannot be forgotten accidentally. (and UC pages in the buddy are _hard_ to notice after the fact) There is no aliasing danger i believe: IO bars should never be marked as general RAM in the e820.


agreed, esp for .25

it's sort of a weird case of ioremap() use; I wonder if longer term we need
to have a different sort of interface for this kind of use...
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/