drop swiotlb patches from 6.1 and 6.2 queues

diff --git a/queue-6.1/series b/queue-6.1/series
index 6632fdf9d0dee8f913e675257eaaf73906593cb8..3f0a1259cdf2c5d9a2b24c1c6e37801ebbc036ff 100644 (file)
--- a/queue-6.1/series
+++ b/queue-6.1/series
@@ -63,13 +63,11 @@ btrfs-fix-uninitialized-variable-warning-in-btrfs_up.patch
 btrfs-use-temporary-variable-for-space_info-in-btrfs.patch
 mtd-rawnand-meson-initialize-struct-with-zeroes.patch
 mtd-nand-mxic-ecc-fix-mxic_ecc_data_xfer_wait_for_co.patch
-swiotlb-fix-the-deadlock-in-swiotlb_do_find_slots.patch
 ca8210-fix-unsigned-mac_len-comparison-with-zero-in-.patch
 riscv-kvm-fix-vm-hang-in-case-of-timer-delta-being-z.patch
 mips-bmips-bcm6358-disable-rac-flush-for-tp1.patch
 alsa-usb-audio-fix-recursive-locking-at-xrun-during-.patch
 pci-dwc-fix-port_link_control-update-when-cdm-check-.patch
-swiotlb-fix-slot-alignment-checks.patch
 platform-x86-think-lmi-add-missing-type-attribute.patch
 platform-x86-think-lmi-use-correct-possible_values-d.patch
 platform-x86-think-lmi-only-display-possible_values-.patch

diff --git a/queue-6.1/swiotlb-fix-slot-alignment-checks.patch b/queue-6.1/swiotlb-fix-slot-alignment-checks.patch
deleted file mode 100644 (file)
index babfffc..0000000
--- a/queue-6.1/swiotlb-fix-slot-alignment-checks.patch
+++ /dev/null
@@ -1,80 +0,0 @@
-From 6b19ccf221a13a2afa961c8ffffd7472127e69bc Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
-From: Sasha Levin <sashal@kernel.org>
-Date: Tue, 21 Mar 2023 09:31:27 +0100
-Subject: swiotlb: fix slot alignment checks
-
-From: Petr Tesarik <petr.tesarik.ext@huawei.com>
-
-[ Upstream commit 0eee5ae1025699ea93d44fdb6ef2365505082103 ]
-
-Explicit alignment and page alignment are used only to calculate
-the stride, not when checking actual slot physical address.
-
-Originally, only page alignment was implemented, and that worked,
-because the whole SWIOTLB is allocated on a page boundary, so
-aligning the start index was sufficient to ensure a page-aligned
-slot.
-
-When commit 1f221a0d0dbf ("swiotlb: respect min_align_mask") added
-support for min_align_mask, the index could be incremented in the
-search loop, potentially finding an unaligned slot if minimum device
-alignment is between IO_TLB_SIZE and PAGE_SIZE.  The bug could go
-unnoticed, because the slot size is 2 KiB, and the most common page
-size is 4 KiB, so there is no alignment value in between.
-
-IIUC the intention has been to find a slot that conforms to all
-alignment constraints: device minimum alignment, an explicit
-alignment (given as function parameter) and optionally page
-alignment (if allocation size is >= PAGE_SIZE). The most
-restrictive mask can be trivially computed with logical AND. The
-rest can stay.
-
-Fixes: 1f221a0d0dbf ("swiotlb: respect min_align_mask")
-Fixes: e81e99bacc9f ("swiotlb: Support aligned swiotlb buffers")
-Signed-off-by: Petr Tesarik <petr.tesarik.ext@huawei.com>
-Signed-off-by: Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>
-Signed-off-by: Sasha Levin <sashal@kernel.org>
----
- kernel/dma/swiotlb.c | 16 ++++++++++------
- 1 file changed, 10 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
-
-diff --git a/kernel/dma/swiotlb.c b/kernel/dma/swiotlb.c
-index 1ecd0d1f7231a..eeb5695c3f286 100644
---- a/kernel/dma/swiotlb.c
-+++ b/kernel/dma/swiotlb.c
-@@ -626,22 +626,26 @@ static int swiotlb_do_find_slots(struct device *dev, int area_index,
-       BUG_ON(!nslots);
-       BUG_ON(area_index >= mem->nareas);
- 
-+      /*
-+       * For allocations of PAGE_SIZE or larger only look for page aligned
-+       * allocations.
-+       */
-+      if (alloc_size >= PAGE_SIZE)
-+              iotlb_align_mask &= PAGE_MASK;
-+      iotlb_align_mask &= alloc_align_mask;
-+
-       /*
-        * For mappings with an alignment requirement don't bother looping to
--       * unaligned slots once we found an aligned one.  For allocations of
--       * PAGE_SIZE or larger only look for page aligned allocations.
-+       * unaligned slots once we found an aligned one.
-        */
-       stride = (iotlb_align_mask >> IO_TLB_SHIFT) + 1;
--      if (alloc_size >= PAGE_SIZE)
--              stride = max(stride, stride << (PAGE_SHIFT - IO_TLB_SHIFT));
--      stride = max(stride, (alloc_align_mask >> IO_TLB_SHIFT) + 1);
- 
-       spin_lock_irqsave(&area->lock, flags);
-       if (unlikely(nslots > mem->area_nslabs - area->used))
-               goto not_found;
- 
-       slot_base = area_index * mem->area_nslabs;
--      index = wrap_area_index(mem, ALIGN(area->index, stride));
-+      index = area->index;
- 
-       for (slots_checked = 0; slots_checked < mem->area_nslabs; ) {
-               slot_index = slot_base + index;
--- 
-2.39.2
-

diff --git a/queue-6.1/swiotlb-fix-the-deadlock-in-swiotlb_do_find_slots.patch b/queue-6.1/swiotlb-fix-the-deadlock-in-swiotlb_do_find_slots.patch
deleted file mode 100644 (file)
index 4fee09e..0000000
--- a/queue-6.1/swiotlb-fix-the-deadlock-in-swiotlb_do_find_slots.patch
+++ /dev/null
@@ -1,113 +0,0 @@
-From 9466c1da4cf8169876da5c26c0e31427150d91cb Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
-From: Sasha Levin <sashal@kernel.org>
-Date: Thu, 23 Feb 2023 00:53:15 +0800
-Subject: swiotlb: fix the deadlock in swiotlb_do_find_slots
-
-From: GuoRui.Yu <GuoRui.Yu@linux.alibaba.com>
-
-[ Upstream commit 7c3940bf81e5664cdb50c3fedfec8f0a756a34fb ]
-
-In general, if swiotlb is sufficient, the logic of index =
-wrap_area_index(mem, index + 1) is fine, it will quickly take a slot and
-release the area->lock; But if swiotlb is insufficient and the device
-has min_align_mask requirements, such as NVME, we may not be able to
-satisfy index == wrap and exit the loop properly. In this case, other
-kernel threads will not be able to acquire the area->lock and release
-the slot, resulting in a deadlock.
-
-The current implementation of wrap_area_index does not involve a modulo
-operation, so adjusting the wrap to ensure the loop ends is not trivial.
-Introduce a new variable to record the number of loops and exit the loop
-after completing the traversal.
-
-Backtraces:
-Other CPUs are waiting this core to exit the swiotlb_do_find_slots
-loop.
-[10199.924391] RIP: 0010:swiotlb_do_find_slots+0x1fe/0x3e0
-[10199.924403] Call Trace:
-[10199.924404]  <TASK>
-[10199.924405]  swiotlb_tbl_map_single+0xec/0x1f0
-[10199.924407]  swiotlb_map+0x5c/0x260
-[10199.924409]  ? nvme_pci_setup_prps+0x1ed/0x340
-[10199.924411]  dma_direct_map_page+0x12e/0x1c0
-[10199.924413]  nvme_map_data+0x304/0x370
-[10199.924415]  nvme_prep_rq.part.0+0x31/0x120
-[10199.924417]  nvme_queue_rq+0x77/0x1f0
-
-...
-[ 9639.596311] NMI backtrace for cpu 48
-[ 9639.596336] Call Trace:
-[ 9639.596337]
-[ 9639.596338] _raw_spin_lock_irqsave+0x37/0x40
-[ 9639.596341] swiotlb_do_find_slots+0xef/0x3e0
-[ 9639.596344] swiotlb_tbl_map_single+0xec/0x1f0
-[ 9639.596347] swiotlb_map+0x5c/0x260
-[ 9639.596349] dma_direct_map_sg+0x7a/0x280
-[ 9639.596352] __dma_map_sg_attrs+0x30/0x70
-[ 9639.596355] dma_map_sgtable+0x1d/0x30
-[ 9639.596356] nvme_map_data+0xce/0x370
-
-...
-[ 9639.595665] NMI backtrace for cpu 50
-[ 9639.595682] Call Trace:
-[ 9639.595682]
-[ 9639.595683] _raw_spin_lock_irqsave+0x37/0x40
-[ 9639.595686] swiotlb_release_slots.isra.0+0x86/0x180
-[ 9639.595688] dma_direct_unmap_sg+0xcf/0x1a0
-[ 9639.595690] nvme_unmap_data.part.0+0x43/0xc0
-
-Fixes: 1f221a0d0dbf ("swiotlb: respect min_align_mask")
-Signed-off-by: GuoRui.Yu <GuoRui.Yu@linux.alibaba.com>
-Signed-off-by: Xiaokang Hu <xiaokang.hxk@alibaba-inc.com>
-Signed-off-by: Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>
-Signed-off-by: Sasha Levin <sashal@kernel.org>
----
- kernel/dma/swiotlb.c | 10 ++++++----
- 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
-
-diff --git a/kernel/dma/swiotlb.c b/kernel/dma/swiotlb.c
-index 339a990554e7f..1ecd0d1f7231a 100644
---- a/kernel/dma/swiotlb.c
-+++ b/kernel/dma/swiotlb.c
-@@ -617,8 +617,8 @@ static int swiotlb_do_find_slots(struct device *dev, int area_index,
-       unsigned int iotlb_align_mask =
-               dma_get_min_align_mask(dev) & ~(IO_TLB_SIZE - 1);
-       unsigned int nslots = nr_slots(alloc_size), stride;
--      unsigned int index, wrap, count = 0, i;
-       unsigned int offset = swiotlb_align_offset(dev, orig_addr);
-+      unsigned int index, slots_checked, count = 0, i;
-       unsigned long flags;
-       unsigned int slot_base;
-       unsigned int slot_index;
-@@ -641,15 +641,16 @@ static int swiotlb_do_find_slots(struct device *dev, int area_index,
-               goto not_found;
- 
-       slot_base = area_index * mem->area_nslabs;
--      index = wrap = wrap_area_index(mem, ALIGN(area->index, stride));
-+      index = wrap_area_index(mem, ALIGN(area->index, stride));
- 
--      do {
-+      for (slots_checked = 0; slots_checked < mem->area_nslabs; ) {
-               slot_index = slot_base + index;
- 
-               if (orig_addr &&
-                   (slot_addr(tbl_dma_addr, slot_index) &
-                    iotlb_align_mask) != (orig_addr & iotlb_align_mask)) {
-                       index = wrap_area_index(mem, index + 1);
-+                      slots_checked++;
-                       continue;
-               }
- 
-@@ -665,7 +666,8 @@ static int swiotlb_do_find_slots(struct device *dev, int area_index,
-                               goto found;
-               }
-               index = wrap_area_index(mem, index + stride);
--      } while (index != wrap);
-+              slots_checked += stride;
-+      }
- 
- not_found:
-       spin_unlock_irqrestore(&area->lock, flags);
--- 
-2.39.2
-

diff --git a/queue-6.2/series b/queue-6.2/series
index 03fbeb6ef22c039b57be923f4838a84c8ea3fba9..2e9a23425416e6d21155f45d6cd0703bbeabdad6 100644 (file)
--- a/queue-6.2/series
+++ b/queue-6.2/series
@@ -61,13 +61,11 @@ btrfs-fix-uninitialized-variable-warning-in-btrfs_up.patch
 btrfs-use-temporary-variable-for-space_info-in-btrfs.patch
 mtd-rawnand-meson-initialize-struct-with-zeroes.patch
 mtd-nand-mxic-ecc-fix-mxic_ecc_data_xfer_wait_for_co.patch
-swiotlb-fix-the-deadlock-in-swiotlb_do_find_slots.patch
 ca8210-fix-unsigned-mac_len-comparison-with-zero-in-.patch
 riscv-kvm-fix-vm-hang-in-case-of-timer-delta-being-z.patch
 mips-bmips-bcm6358-disable-rac-flush-for-tp1.patch
 alsa-usb-audio-fix-recursive-locking-at-xrun-during-.patch
 pci-dwc-fix-port_link_control-update-when-cdm-check-.patch
-swiotlb-fix-slot-alignment-checks.patch
 platform-x86-think-lmi-add-missing-type-attribute.patch
 platform-x86-think-lmi-use-correct-possible_values-d.patch
 platform-x86-think-lmi-only-display-possible_values-.patch

diff --git a/queue-6.2/swiotlb-fix-slot-alignment-checks.patch b/queue-6.2/swiotlb-fix-slot-alignment-checks.patch
deleted file mode 100644 (file)
index 6a47ed9..0000000
--- a/queue-6.2/swiotlb-fix-slot-alignment-checks.patch
+++ /dev/null
@@ -1,80 +0,0 @@
-From 5b40da7a8b4802ef6cf63b3c2ed19fb62f374878 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
-From: Sasha Levin <sashal@kernel.org>
-Date: Tue, 21 Mar 2023 09:31:27 +0100
-Subject: swiotlb: fix slot alignment checks
-
-From: Petr Tesarik <petr.tesarik.ext@huawei.com>
-
-[ Upstream commit 0eee5ae1025699ea93d44fdb6ef2365505082103 ]
-
-Explicit alignment and page alignment are used only to calculate
-the stride, not when checking actual slot physical address.
-
-Originally, only page alignment was implemented, and that worked,
-because the whole SWIOTLB is allocated on a page boundary, so
-aligning the start index was sufficient to ensure a page-aligned
-slot.
-
-When commit 1f221a0d0dbf ("swiotlb: respect min_align_mask") added
-support for min_align_mask, the index could be incremented in the
-search loop, potentially finding an unaligned slot if minimum device
-alignment is between IO_TLB_SIZE and PAGE_SIZE.  The bug could go
-unnoticed, because the slot size is 2 KiB, and the most common page
-size is 4 KiB, so there is no alignment value in between.
-
-IIUC the intention has been to find a slot that conforms to all
-alignment constraints: device minimum alignment, an explicit
-alignment (given as function parameter) and optionally page
-alignment (if allocation size is >= PAGE_SIZE). The most
-restrictive mask can be trivially computed with logical AND. The
-rest can stay.
-
-Fixes: 1f221a0d0dbf ("swiotlb: respect min_align_mask")
-Fixes: e81e99bacc9f ("swiotlb: Support aligned swiotlb buffers")
-Signed-off-by: Petr Tesarik <petr.tesarik.ext@huawei.com>
-Signed-off-by: Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>
-Signed-off-by: Sasha Levin <sashal@kernel.org>
----
- kernel/dma/swiotlb.c | 16 ++++++++++------
- 1 file changed, 10 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
-
-diff --git a/kernel/dma/swiotlb.c b/kernel/dma/swiotlb.c
-index 869dd6667c464..312458506e6d5 100644
---- a/kernel/dma/swiotlb.c
-+++ b/kernel/dma/swiotlb.c
-@@ -642,22 +642,26 @@ static int swiotlb_do_find_slots(struct device *dev, int area_index,
-       BUG_ON(!nslots);
-       BUG_ON(area_index >= mem->nareas);
- 
-+      /*
-+       * For allocations of PAGE_SIZE or larger only look for page aligned
-+       * allocations.
-+       */
-+      if (alloc_size >= PAGE_SIZE)
-+              iotlb_align_mask &= PAGE_MASK;
-+      iotlb_align_mask &= alloc_align_mask;
-+
-       /*
-        * For mappings with an alignment requirement don't bother looping to
--       * unaligned slots once we found an aligned one.  For allocations of
--       * PAGE_SIZE or larger only look for page aligned allocations.
-+       * unaligned slots once we found an aligned one.
-        */
-       stride = (iotlb_align_mask >> IO_TLB_SHIFT) + 1;
--      if (alloc_size >= PAGE_SIZE)
--              stride = max(stride, stride << (PAGE_SHIFT - IO_TLB_SHIFT));
--      stride = max(stride, (alloc_align_mask >> IO_TLB_SHIFT) + 1);
- 
-       spin_lock_irqsave(&area->lock, flags);
-       if (unlikely(nslots > mem->area_nslabs - area->used))
-               goto not_found;
- 
-       slot_base = area_index * mem->area_nslabs;
--      index = wrap_area_index(mem, ALIGN(area->index, stride));
-+      index = area->index;
- 
-       for (slots_checked = 0; slots_checked < mem->area_nslabs; ) {
-               slot_index = slot_base + index;
--- 
-2.39.2
-

diff --git a/queue-6.2/swiotlb-fix-the-deadlock-in-swiotlb_do_find_slots.patch b/queue-6.2/swiotlb-fix-the-deadlock-in-swiotlb_do_find_slots.patch
deleted file mode 100644 (file)
index 83d3464..0000000
--- a/queue-6.2/swiotlb-fix-the-deadlock-in-swiotlb_do_find_slots.patch
+++ /dev/null
@@ -1,113 +0,0 @@
-From 1222a2257dd9ea061e9994748c3496703b8a0d4f Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
-From: Sasha Levin <sashal@kernel.org>
-Date: Thu, 23 Feb 2023 00:53:15 +0800
-Subject: swiotlb: fix the deadlock in swiotlb_do_find_slots
-
-From: GuoRui.Yu <GuoRui.Yu@linux.alibaba.com>
-
-[ Upstream commit 7c3940bf81e5664cdb50c3fedfec8f0a756a34fb ]
-
-In general, if swiotlb is sufficient, the logic of index =
-wrap_area_index(mem, index + 1) is fine, it will quickly take a slot and
-release the area->lock; But if swiotlb is insufficient and the device
-has min_align_mask requirements, such as NVME, we may not be able to
-satisfy index == wrap and exit the loop properly. In this case, other
-kernel threads will not be able to acquire the area->lock and release
-the slot, resulting in a deadlock.
-
-The current implementation of wrap_area_index does not involve a modulo
-operation, so adjusting the wrap to ensure the loop ends is not trivial.
-Introduce a new variable to record the number of loops and exit the loop
-after completing the traversal.
-
-Backtraces:
-Other CPUs are waiting this core to exit the swiotlb_do_find_slots
-loop.
-[10199.924391] RIP: 0010:swiotlb_do_find_slots+0x1fe/0x3e0
-[10199.924403] Call Trace:
-[10199.924404]  <TASK>
-[10199.924405]  swiotlb_tbl_map_single+0xec/0x1f0
-[10199.924407]  swiotlb_map+0x5c/0x260
-[10199.924409]  ? nvme_pci_setup_prps+0x1ed/0x340
-[10199.924411]  dma_direct_map_page+0x12e/0x1c0
-[10199.924413]  nvme_map_data+0x304/0x370
-[10199.924415]  nvme_prep_rq.part.0+0x31/0x120
-[10199.924417]  nvme_queue_rq+0x77/0x1f0
-
-...
-[ 9639.596311] NMI backtrace for cpu 48
-[ 9639.596336] Call Trace:
-[ 9639.596337]
-[ 9639.596338] _raw_spin_lock_irqsave+0x37/0x40
-[ 9639.596341] swiotlb_do_find_slots+0xef/0x3e0
-[ 9639.596344] swiotlb_tbl_map_single+0xec/0x1f0
-[ 9639.596347] swiotlb_map+0x5c/0x260
-[ 9639.596349] dma_direct_map_sg+0x7a/0x280
-[ 9639.596352] __dma_map_sg_attrs+0x30/0x70
-[ 9639.596355] dma_map_sgtable+0x1d/0x30
-[ 9639.596356] nvme_map_data+0xce/0x370
-
-...
-[ 9639.595665] NMI backtrace for cpu 50
-[ 9639.595682] Call Trace:
-[ 9639.595682]
-[ 9639.595683] _raw_spin_lock_irqsave+0x37/0x40
-[ 9639.595686] swiotlb_release_slots.isra.0+0x86/0x180
-[ 9639.595688] dma_direct_unmap_sg+0xcf/0x1a0
-[ 9639.595690] nvme_unmap_data.part.0+0x43/0xc0
-
-Fixes: 1f221a0d0dbf ("swiotlb: respect min_align_mask")
-Signed-off-by: GuoRui.Yu <GuoRui.Yu@linux.alibaba.com>
-Signed-off-by: Xiaokang Hu <xiaokang.hxk@alibaba-inc.com>
-Signed-off-by: Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>
-Signed-off-by: Sasha Levin <sashal@kernel.org>
----
- kernel/dma/swiotlb.c | 10 ++++++----
- 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
-
-diff --git a/kernel/dma/swiotlb.c b/kernel/dma/swiotlb.c
-index ef3bc3a5bbed3..869dd6667c464 100644
---- a/kernel/dma/swiotlb.c
-+++ b/kernel/dma/swiotlb.c
-@@ -633,8 +633,8 @@ static int swiotlb_do_find_slots(struct device *dev, int area_index,
-       unsigned int iotlb_align_mask =
-               dma_get_min_align_mask(dev) & ~(IO_TLB_SIZE - 1);
-       unsigned int nslots = nr_slots(alloc_size), stride;
--      unsigned int index, wrap, count = 0, i;
-       unsigned int offset = swiotlb_align_offset(dev, orig_addr);
-+      unsigned int index, slots_checked, count = 0, i;
-       unsigned long flags;
-       unsigned int slot_base;
-       unsigned int slot_index;
-@@ -657,15 +657,16 @@ static int swiotlb_do_find_slots(struct device *dev, int area_index,
-               goto not_found;
- 
-       slot_base = area_index * mem->area_nslabs;
--      index = wrap = wrap_area_index(mem, ALIGN(area->index, stride));
-+      index = wrap_area_index(mem, ALIGN(area->index, stride));
- 
--      do {
-+      for (slots_checked = 0; slots_checked < mem->area_nslabs; ) {
-               slot_index = slot_base + index;
- 
-               if (orig_addr &&
-                   (slot_addr(tbl_dma_addr, slot_index) &
-                    iotlb_align_mask) != (orig_addr & iotlb_align_mask)) {
-                       index = wrap_area_index(mem, index + 1);
-+                      slots_checked++;
-                       continue;
-               }
- 
-@@ -681,7 +682,8 @@ static int swiotlb_do_find_slots(struct device *dev, int area_index,
-                               goto found;
-               }
-               index = wrap_area_index(mem, index + stride);
--      } while (index != wrap);
-+              slots_checked += stride;
-+      }
- 
- not_found:
-       spin_unlock_irqrestore(&area->lock, flags);
--- 
-2.39.2
-