[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] Re: [PATCH] x86/xen/mmu: Increase MAX_CONTIG_ORDER
On 12/12/2024 12:09, Juergen Gross wrote: > On 12.12.24 11:22, Jan Beulich wrote: >> On 11.12.2024 19:20, Thierry Escande wrote: >>> Hi Jan, >>> >>> On 09/12/2024 11:04, Jan Beulich wrote: >>>> On 04.12.2024 18:14, Thierry Escande wrote: >>>>> With change 9f40ec84a797 (xen/swiotlb: add alignment check for dma >>>>> buffers), the driver mpt3sas fails to load because it cannot allocate >>>>> its DMA pool for an allocation size of ~2,3 MBytes. This is because >>>>> the >>>>> alignement check added by 9f40ec84a797 fails and >>>>> xen_swiotlb_alloc_coherent() ends up calling >>>>> xen_create_contiguous_region() with a size order of 10 which is too >>>>> high >>>>> for the current max value. >>>>> >>>>> This patch increases the MAX_CONTIG_ORDER from 9 to 10 (4MB) to allow >>>>> such allocations. >>>>> >>>>> Signed-off-by: Thierry Escande <thierry.escande@xxxxxxxxxx> >>>>> --- >>>>> arch/x86/xen/mmu_pv.c | 2 +- >>>>> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) >>>>> >>>>> diff --git a/arch/x86/xen/mmu_pv.c b/arch/x86/xen/mmu_pv.c >>>>> index 55a4996d0c04..7f110740e1a2 100644 >>>>> --- a/arch/x86/xen/mmu_pv.c >>>>> +++ b/arch/x86/xen/mmu_pv.c >>>>> @@ -2200,7 +2200,7 @@ void __init xen_init_mmu_ops(void) >>>>> } >>>>> /* Protected by xen_reservation_lock. */ >>>>> -#define MAX_CONTIG_ORDER 9 /* 2MB */ >>>>> +#define MAX_CONTIG_ORDER 10 /* 4MB */ >>>>> static unsigned long discontig_frames[1<<MAX_CONTIG_ORDER]; >>>> >>>> While lacking respective commentary, bumping this value imo also >>>> needs to >>>> take into account Xen itself, at least commit-message-wise. The >>>> bumping is >>>> fine for Dom0 in any event. It is also fine for DomU-s with the >>>> defaults >>>> built into the hypervisor (orders 12 and 10 respectively for x86 and >>>> Arm), >>>> yet especially for Arm (and in the future PPC and RISC-V) any further >>>> bumping would be less straightforward. >>> >>> Thanks for pointing this out. On the Xen side, CONFIG_CTLDOM_MAX_ORDER >>> and CONFIG_HWDOM_MAX_ORDER seem big enough on all architectures. But I >>> see CONFIG_DOMU_MAX_ORDER set to 9 (also all archs). Won't that be a >>> problem for drivers trying to allocate more than that from a domU ? >> >> A driver assumes a (physical) device to be in the DomU, at which point it >> is CONFIG_PTDOM_MAX_ORDER which applies (PT standing for pass-through). >> >>>> However - does the driver really need this big a contiguous chunk? It >>>> would seem far more desirable to me to break that up some, if possible. >>> >>> Since this works on bare metal I'm afraid the driver maintainer (mpt >>> fusion driver) will just tell me to fix Xen. >> >> Well. The bigger such allocations, the larger the risk that on systems >> that have been up for a while such allocations can't be fulfilled anymore >> even in the bare metal case. > > Yes. I don't think we should just work around this issue without having > even tried to get the driver fixed. In case they refuse to change it, we > can still increase MAX_CONTIG_ORDER. Thanks for the feedback. I'll try to have a look at the driver if I have time to do so. Regards, Thierry
|
Lists.xenproject.org is hosted with RackSpace, monitoring our |