From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received-SPF: Pass (sender SPF authorized) identity=mailfrom; client-ip=63.128.21.162; helo=us-smtp-delivery-162.mimecast.com; envelope-from=eugene@hp.com; receiver=edk2-devel@lists.01.org Received: from us-smtp-delivery-162.mimecast.com (us-smtp-delivery-162.mimecast.com [63.128.21.162]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ml01.01.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E8CD3211CD9BA for ; Thu, 28 Feb 2019 13:59:02 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=hp.com; s=mimecast20180716; t=1551391141; h=from:from:sender:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date: message-id:message-id:to:to:cc:mime-version:mime-version: content-type:content-type:content-transfer-encoding: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=S/7+e0Jp5qD6wmphtkyxZkiSAvzgocIzfAtPc8FI+JI=; b=FadLfHVVhSaIQg4FfcBPfSkfUBKrZL4Vc1uq62ryrnM8xrPBNEfpQdVmkKHIJ6WLZ6u3eqXbyN6rOfnvdyZTr3POu/UIq4KbXsvVCf9FdMu6xfrNMj0xCZTrJQldZDL6zD9+xQKCCGdvZsv1bx/FBliBUA50F4QMcVH4WTwgFKc= Received: from NAM04-SN1-obe.outbound.protection.outlook.com (mail-sn1nam04lp2056.outbound.protection.outlook.com [104.47.44.56]) (Using TLS) by relay.mimecast.com with ESMTP id us-mta-208-dn4eYnRwOGy8lFjUQ9FzJA-1; Thu, 28 Feb 2019 16:58:58 -0500 Received: from CS1PR8401MB1189.NAMPRD84.PROD.OUTLOOK.COM (10.169.97.20) by CS1PR8401MB0549.NAMPRD84.PROD.OUTLOOK.COM (10.169.14.12) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id 15.20.1643.19; Thu, 28 Feb 2019 21:58:55 +0000 Received: from CS1PR8401MB1189.NAMPRD84.PROD.OUTLOOK.COM ([fe80::ec9d:c9c3:8a92:4378]) by CS1PR8401MB1189.NAMPRD84.PROD.OUTLOOK.COM ([fe80::ec9d:c9c3:8a92:4378%4]) with mapi id 15.20.1643.019; Thu, 28 Feb 2019 21:58:55 +0000 From: "Cohen, Eugene" To: Ashish Singhal , "Wu, Hao A" , "edk2-devel@lists.01.org" , Ard Biesheuvel Thread-Topic: [PATCH] MdeModulePkg/SdMmcPciHcDxe: Fix DMA on SDHC v3 64-bit systems Thread-Index: AdTOimUh6bq74L7bQyCZsF0hnADHfgAhuWlQABE+2EAAEKP68AABVU+wAANAbhAAAOJ+kA== Date: Thu, 28 Feb 2019 21:58:55 +0000 Message-ID: References: In-Reply-To: Accept-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: x-originating-ip: [15.65.252.14] x-ms-publictraffictype: Email x-ms-office365-filtering-correlation-id: a93e1321-f330-41c0-169d-08d69dc7ef4e x-microsoft-antispam: BCL:0; PCL:0; RULEID:(2390118)(7020095)(4652040)(8989299)(4534185)(4627221)(201703031133081)(201702281549075)(8990200)(5600127)(711020)(4605104)(2017052603328)(7153060)(7193020); SRVR:CS1PR8401MB0549; x-ms-traffictypediagnostic: CS1PR8401MB0549: x-ms-exchange-purlcount: 4 x-microsoft-exchange-diagnostics: =?iso-8859-1?Q?1; CS1PR8401MB0549; 23:ApZsJerzRbxPW+LP17W5AALtxwv3CDAWJ/BhW?= =?iso-8859-1?Q?RPdcDKc3aBRN8h2/CGlrXd2akC90UXsf+m97j2aZoXHy4s3Arh/Ork4Mmw?= =?iso-8859-1?Q?+FZauCoLFXaO7uK80cYnqV/Nk5bcPbWBJZV+JtEoBqaE8i3C09oS/Ef2Ba?= =?iso-8859-1?Q?2LU9bcv4ETxD7rJit54BFUJENitZk31qfk/BLK4wJmS83rP+rZBCCm66/g?= =?iso-8859-1?Q?jK6/wfzm7IQ9yMqay7zpTFog649kVFDs21ZsSfJM3E4gdAHjgbY6k/3G1W?= =?iso-8859-1?Q?HZFYlvuBHr6MmBdkyBNC55ZgDTXQK8jMdiCTSb9/t+D2GYzSC35XPRKWD0?= =?iso-8859-1?Q?d9BpWxrlfWPQijIyeU1aXUIRaRYchklo6UO7MHag1Bhnru1AbThg+ZxvtG?= =?iso-8859-1?Q?TP/ft+vWdQzg9dWQBsmyH/Ezwkw3druTevM0jiPO6HLOld9GVwc5dkOqEL?= =?iso-8859-1?Q?ssd9Fnt6GrYTiayUZ4nKSJUx5nJrrrCvFAq/+ajC0Vo2DCCUqxu5HGhr9T?= =?iso-8859-1?Q?QR1cAUSoJ2CDKkpbwEt6/aMJgH5gmLkvMx8LOdCJZ4Wu8p26m9byy0QH5i?= =?iso-8859-1?Q?y9nMtpJ13qmYCdit9CNoeSH9+0yOkDRxcXuQxlAhuta76kpLNEcTIeb/CN?= =?iso-8859-1?Q?2ootvj/wMczhlPa1e4U0I349ig5NXDojL0zh0KhZwJUAy0EYHESavt88B5?= =?iso-8859-1?Q?QKhytBln8tCAMjlN3tTeI1Fr/lgbkRRF44XkdLj5Y5H6fWikW/mUPJQvbz?= =?iso-8859-1?Q?NplL1pc9VHqgpkWFca/n5RvdULAs7cY3x44qFgmZAljuAnGuzsmUXQrOtn?= =?iso-8859-1?Q?sUvdnoegjNyVHQYsEleqZH5xbKB7GdQuClWGFkqrliMwhlBfKp6HPHINry?= =?iso-8859-1?Q?MgGYJ4Adfbyq2AVLihWAXPdAzuwYWlLAfPFT6ap5LHJcuIXnvNJCQmjFCb?= =?iso-8859-1?Q?5IofDNHVoIQpsEmXD2RtbALOlGKT2Owm+srzkKKVnU6gG3hqxY0kzHcAnP?= =?iso-8859-1?Q?6sL/Htpstvbkh490yikOh6PAUccQJZTo7Tbe7whBtlf0Til7h8UE/dIOTR?= =?iso-8859-1?Q?o7CVfxrHIyWF8DT06mZYDzukDwHjBxskquzbJ8VK2M9aBrEuh5+UqN3bwc?= =?iso-8859-1?Q?XCJzrvidjjaAbifX4AMlthx5HakmD7gf45J4RYMo0YFTYRjRBdbCBWvIL5?= =?iso-8859-1?Q?BKCxHlvc7SX/OOC7RizF9Pjhuhp22ItjMFdwxTq78aVa5x6dprbp5nnopo?= =?iso-8859-1?Q?255Xs/DdFwP/xlFwltMcXfiWp89Du81OZdUffULhr187/bsW8bClQAkG7j?= =?iso-8859-1?Q?1FJuzZRtbs8IFxC33JBmgyq+ZyRzDEOqaP3XYS+S6RoA88y5MYEUALZk2L?= =?iso-8859-1?Q?xOrgGURM5A/5dtt0vlWpvrFy1RrfnahgDku5UvnqZqzL9fR+wKJh+TyvXi?= =?iso-8859-1?Q?fJfp93reXeJaRAWj9e23QpKabVWXKThyyW8JSPKlDEMBpfXUE1gHnO4QWA?= =?iso-8859-1?B?QT09?= x-microsoft-antispam-prvs: x-forefront-prvs: 0962D394D2 x-forefront-antispam-report: SFV:NSPM; SFS:(10019020)(6029001)(136003)(396003)(376002)(346002)(39860400002)(366004)(6602003)(13464003)(189003)(199004)(105586002)(106356001)(76176011)(97736004)(7696005)(93886005)(68736007)(26005)(606006)(5660300002)(81166006)(7736002)(186003)(81156014)(476003)(8676002)(11346002)(446003)(486006)(6246003)(8936002)(55016002)(30864003)(33656002)(71200400001)(99286004)(71190400001)(2906002)(74316002)(53936002)(2501003)(9686003)(6436002)(25786009)(6116002)(3846002)(478600001)(6306002)(14444005)(236005)(53946003)(110136005)(54896002)(316002)(53546011)(102836004)(229853002)(14454004)(66066001)(966005)(256004)(86362001)(6506007)(790700001); DIR:OUT; SFP:1102; SCL:1; SRVR:CS1PR8401MB0549; H:CS1PR8401MB1189.NAMPRD84.PROD.OUTLOOK.COM; FPR:; SPF:None; LANG:en; PTR:InfoNoRecords; MX:1; A:1; x-ms-exchange-senderadcheck: 1 x-microsoft-antispam-message-info: jxbYQtZmRJAclZd+/raCeb8n9NccO4TJEG9YUPThWxtwTAJVGAWteqBOcUI11jPM0ncgyI9FzReS+EUNiqePyHvOQyZpsw4L2Sz7Bt3tDrduhBWjnVtAccYs9so4ZWIYE7dLr8b77W6eP4/s2lA8MlZ6182CJqOa+kN9jF+YQ23N95X4oG/gFkyt1Rd5E59IQERy9xmIIjPEjEtPulgYR2RRANepfaIosOul+s0MdPbQJVFM67hS4pNiEx6QKuyPqNGVlTAqI1XlrB/++D/w2O6p9vlGtRJhDRsYJ56B5xy5TCA6939rWx/ncfH6mGpVHgJ4U5qF6bicgC5CsjXNJuOdu2jQ5q7Z3hmXvmHnjjpZXrPhpUhqY9DptJvxNX4OwiVZWyvwnQ4WuSOBWzmnHaRc1/WVxUY7s7LGM2/lIQk= MIME-Version: 1.0 X-OriginatorOrg: hp.com X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-Network-Message-Id: a93e1321-f330-41c0-169d-08d69dc7ef4e X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-originalarrivaltime: 28 Feb 2019 21:58:55.6627 (UTC) X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-fromentityheader: Hosted X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-id: ca7981a2-785a-463d-b82a-3db87dfc3ce6 X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-mailboxtype: HOSTED X-MS-Exchange-Transport-CrossTenantHeadersStamped: CS1PR8401MB0549 X-MC-Unique: dn4eYnRwOGy8lFjUQ9FzJA-1 X-Mimecast-Spam-Score: 0 X-Content-Filtered-By: Mailman/MimeDel 2.1.29 Subject: Re: [PATCH] MdeModulePkg/SdMmcPciHcDxe: Fix DMA on SDHC v3 64-bit systems X-BeenThere: edk2-devel@lists.01.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: EDK II Development List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 28 Feb 2019 21:59:03 -0000 Content-Language: en-US Content-Type: text/plain; charset=WINDOWS-1252 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Ashish, =D8 Right now, we disable 64b DMA Support in PCI if the controller cannot = support 64b DMA in V3 as well as V4. If either of these support 64b DMA, w= e do not disable it. In the code, we set Support64BitDma to TRUE by default= and change it to FALSE only if any of the controller does not support it i= n V3 as well as V4. If all controllers support it in V3 or V4 we keep 64b D= MA support enabled. That is precisely the problem. An SDHC v3 controller might support 64b DMA= in V3 but not in V4 mode. The current code will leave 64b DMA support ena= bled resulting in the issuing of the PCI DUAL_ADDRESS_CYCLE attribute ( see= https://github.com/tianocore/edk2/blob/ece4c1de3e7b2340d351c2054c79ea689a9= 54ed6/MdeModulePkg/Bus/Pci/SdMmcPciHcDxe/SdMmcPciHcDxe.c#L738 ) which then = causes buffers to be allocated that cannot be DMAed. For reference look at this snippet of the NonDiscoverablePciDeviceIo driver= : https://github.com/tianocore/edk2/blob/ece4c1de3e7b2340d351c2054c79ea689a= 954ed6/MdeModulePkg/Bus/Pci/NonDiscoverablePciDeviceDxe/NonDiscoverablePciD= eviceIo.c#L622 and you can see that bounce buffering will only occur if DUA= L_ADDRESS_CYCLE is clear. So since we do not have V3 64b DMA (96-bit descriptor) support in place we = must not allow the DUAL_ADDRESS_CYCLE attribute to be set or we will fail w= ith this check: https://github.com/tianocore/edk2/blob/ece4c1de3e7b2340d351= c2054c79ea689a954ed6/MdeModulePkg/Bus/Pci/SdMmcPciHcDxe/SdMmcPciHci.c#L1426 I've added Ard who updated the driver with DUAL_ADDRESS_CYCLE support. Eugene From: Ashish Singhal Sent: Thursday, February 28, 2019 2:28 PM To: Cohen, Eugene ; Wu, Hao A ; edk2-dev= el@lists.01.org Subject: RE: [PATCH] MdeModulePkg/SdMmcPciHcDxe: Fix DMA on SDHC v3 64-bit = systems Eugene, We do not have support for V4 64b DMA right now but it can be added later i= f needed. I am trying to understand the reason behind changing the check fr= om AND to OR. Right now, we disable 64b DMA Support in PCI if the controlle= r cannot support 64b DMA in V3 as well as V4. If either of these support 64= b DMA, we do not disable it. In the code, we set Support64BitDma to TRUE by= default and change it to FALSE only if any of the controller does not supp= ort it in V3 as well as V4. If all controllers support it in V3 or V4 we ke= ep 64b DMA support enabled. // // Enable 64-bit DMA support in the PCI layer if this controller // supports it. // if (Support64BitDma) { Status =3D PciIo->Attributes ( PciIo, EfiPciIoAttributeOperationEnable, EFI_PCI_IO_ATTRIBUTE_DUAL_ADDRESS_CYCLE, NULL ); if (EFI_ERROR (Status)) { DEBUG ((DEBUG_WARN, "SdMmcPciHcDriverBindingStart: failed to enable 6= 4-bit DMA (%r)\n", Status)); } } Thanks Ashish From: Cohen, Eugene > Sent: Thursday, February 28, 2019 12:56 PM To: Ashish Singhal = >; Wu, Hao A >; edk2-devel@li= sts.01.org Subject: RE: [PATCH] MdeModulePkg/SdMmcPciHcDxe: Fix DMA on SDHC v3 64-bit = systems Ashish, =D8 With my change, if any of the controller did not support 64b DMA in V3= as well as V4 capability, we are not enabling it in PCI layer. The logic is: if (Private->Capability[Slot].SysBus64V3 =3D=3D 0 && Private->Capability[Slot].SysBus64V4 =3D=3D 0) { Support64BitDma =3D FALSE; } which means that for a SDHC v3 controller you have SysBus64V3=3D1 and SysBu= s64V4=3D0 the FALSE assignment is never done - this is not correct. Perhap= s you intended an OR instead of an AND? Either way changing this to an || = or using my patch is the same logical result because a V3 controller will u= se 32-bit DMA and V4 controller will use 64-bit DMA (a V4 controller should= have the V3 bit set). I really saw no reason to be checking the V3 bit si= nce the driver was unprepared to do V3 64-bit DMA operations anyways. Eugene From: Ashish Singhal > Sent: Thursday, February 28, 2019 12:15 PM To: Cohen, Eugene >; Wu, Hao A >; edk2-devel@lists.01.org Subject: RE: [PATCH] MdeModulePkg/SdMmcPciHcDxe: Fix DMA on SDHC v3 64-bit = systems Hello Eugene, My patch enabled support for SDHC 4.0 and above in general including suppor= t for 64b ADMA descriptor. The check for V3 capability for 64b DMA was alre= ady there and similar check was implemented for V4 capability for 64b DMA. = Earlier, if any of the V3 controller did not support 64b DMA, we were not e= nabling it in PCI layer. With my change, if any of the controller did not s= upport 64b DMA in V3 as well as V4 capability, we are not enabling it in PC= I layer. This check in my opinion is better because we only disable 64b DMA PCI supp= ort when both V3 and V4 have it disabled. Thanks Ashish -----Original Message----- From: Cohen, Eugene > Sent: Thursday, February 28, 2019 4:24 AM To: Wu, Hao A >; edk2-devel@l= ists.01.org Cc: Ashish Singhal = > Subject: RE: [PATCH] MdeModulePkg/SdMmcPciHcDxe: Fix DMA on SDHC v3 64-bit = systems Hao, > I remember the commit b5547b9ce97e80c3127682a2a5d4b9bd14af353e from > Ashish only handles the controllers with version greater or equal to 4.00= . Right - that commit added support for SDHC 4.0 and above. The original driv= er supported SDHC 3.0 albeit only with SDMA and 32-bit ADMA support. With that commit two descriptor types are supported the 32-bit ADMA descrip= tor (SD_MMC_HC_ADMA_32_DESC_LINE which is 64-bits in size) and the V4 64-bi= t ADMA descriptor (SD_MMC_HC_ADMA_64_DESC_LINE which is 128-bits in size). However the commit mistakenly added a check for the V3 capability for 64-bi= t DMA and used it to set the PCI DUAL_ADDRESS_CYCLE attributre which then d= oes not the 32-bit compatible bounce buffer mechanism. Later, when we attem= pt an ADMA data transfer we hit an ASSERT because the PCI DMA subsystem is = not using bounce buffers to provide 32-bit DMA compatible memory. So the pa= tch I submitted simply removes the unnecessary check of the V3 64-bit DMA c= apability check so the PCI DUAL_ADDRESS_CYCLE attribute is not set allowing= 32-bit DMA to succeed on these platforms. > And the ADMA2 (96-bit Descriptor) mode for V3 controllers is selected > by setting the 'DMA Select' filed in the Host Control 1 Register to > 11b. But the currently behavior of the driver is setting the field to > 10b, which I think will not switch to the ADMA2 (96-bit Descriptor) mode = for V3. Correct, right now for a V3 controller only 32-bit DMA is supported. An enh= ancement for V3 64-bit ADMA would improve performance on controllers that s= upport that mode by eliminating the bounce buffer and associated memory cop= ies. I think we should file a BZ for SD HCI V3 64-bit ADMA support - if you= agree I would be happy to do that. I should point out that we have done extensive testing of this change on ou= r host controller. Thanks, Eugene --- From: Wu, Hao A > Sent: Wednesday, February 27, 2019 8:25 PM To: Cohen, Eugene >; edk2-devel@lists.0= 1.org Cc: Ashish Singhal = > Subject: RE: [PATCH] MdeModulePkg/SdMmcPciHcDxe: Fix DMA on SDHC v3 64-bit = systems Loop Ashish in. Some comments below. > -----Original Message----- > From: edk2-devel [mailto:edk2-devel-bounces@lists.01.org] On Behalf Of > Cohen, Eugene > Sent: Wednesday, February 27, 2019 6:59 PM > To: mailto:edk2-devel@lists.01.org; Wu, Hao A > Subject: [edk2] [PATCH] MdeModulePkg/SdMmcPciHcDxe: Fix DMA on SDHC > v3 64-bit systems > > The SdMmcPciHcDriverBindingStart function was checking two different > capability bits in determining whether 64-bit DMA modes were > supported, one mode is defined in the SDHC version > 3 specification (using 96-bit descriptors) and another is defined in > the SDHC version 4 specification (using 128-bit descriptors). Since > the currently implementation of 64-bit > ADMA2 only supports the SDHC version 4 implementation it is incorrect > to check the V3 64-bit capability bit since this will activate V4 > ADMA2 on V3 controllers. I remember the commit b5547b9ce97e80c3127682a2a5d4b9bd14af353e from Ashish = only handles the controllers with version greater or equal to 4.00. And the ADMA2 (96-bit Descriptor) mode for V3 controllers is selected by se= tting the 'DMA Select' filed in the Host Control 1 Register to 11b. But the= currently behavior of the driver is setting the field to 10b, which I thin= k will not switch to the ADMA2 (96-bit Descriptor) mode for V3. Maybe there is something I miss here. Could you help to provide some more d= etail on the issue you met? Thanks. Best Regards, Hao Wu > > Cc: Hao Wu > Contributed-under: TianoCore Contribution Agreement 1.1 > Signed-off-by: Eugene Cohen > --- > MdeModulePkg/Bus/Pci/SdMmcPciHcDxe/SdMmcPciHcDxe.c | 3 +-- > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 2 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/MdeModulePkg/Bus/Pci/SdMmcPciHcDxe/SdMmcPciHcDxe.c > b/MdeModulePkg/Bus/Pci/SdMmcPciHcDxe/SdMmcPciHcDxe.c > index b474f8d..5bc91c5 100644 > --- a/MdeModulePkg/Bus/Pci/SdMmcPciHcDxe/SdMmcPciHcDxe.c > +++ b/MdeModulePkg/Bus/Pci/SdMmcPciHcDxe/SdMmcPciHcDxe.c > @@ -666,8 +666,7 @@ SdMmcPciHcDriverBindingStart ( // If any of the > slots does not support 64b system bus // do not enable 64b DMA in the > PCI layer. > // > - if (Private->Capability[Slot].SysBus64V3 =3D=3D 0 && > - Private->Capability[Slot].SysBus64V4 =3D=3D 0) { > + if (Private->Capability[Slot].SysBus64V4 =3D=3D 0) { > Support64BitDma =3D FALSE; > } > > -- > 2.7.4 > _______________________________________________ > edk2-devel mailing list > mailto:edk2-devel@lists.01.org > https://lists.01.org/mailman/listinfo/edk2-devel ---------------------------------------------------------------------------= -------- This email message is for the sole use of the intended recipient(s) and may= contain confidential information. Any unauthorized review, use, disclosure or distr= ibution is prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the se= nder by reply email and destroy all copies of the original message. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------= --------