Re: iwx 64-bit dma
"Theo de Raadt" <[email protected]> Thu, 30 Jul 2026 09:28:49 -0600
| Newsgroups | gmane.os.openbsd.tech |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
Vitaliy Makkoveev <[email protected]> wrote: > On Wed, Jul 29, 2026 at 07:12:17PM -0600, Theo de Raadt wrote: > > Vitaliy Makkoveev <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > On Wed, Jul 29, 2026 at 06:51:49PM -0600, Theo de Raadt wrote: > > > > Vitaliy Makkoveev <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > > > > The IFXF_MBUF_64BIT flag affects only amd64. All other architectures > > > > > still uses memory below 4G. See revision 1.61 of > > > > > sys/arch/amd64/amd64/autoconf.c line 129. > > > > > > > > I don't see how that matters, that's part of the mechanism for > > > > providing memory to drivers. > > > > > > > > The diff in question which adds BUS_DMA_64BIT is a declaration to > > > > the higher-level code that _all_ chipsets supported by this driver can > > > > work with 64 bit-addressable memory if the higher levels provide it. > > > > > > > > If one chipset can't do it, the experience will be terrible. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Well, this means the revision 1.198 of sys/dev/pci/if_iwx.c is wrong and > > > should be reverted. > > > > No. > > > > It might answer the question I was asking. > > I don't understand your objections. I did not object. > The commit message explicitly says > "this hardware has no issues handling full 64-bit addresses" and the > commit enables 64 bits DMA transfers for *all* iwx(4) chipsets. This > means it can access memory above 4G, right? If so, nothing stops us to > set BUS_DMA_64BIT and allocate mbufs from high memory. What commit message says that? Something a few year ago? I asked a question. It didn't get answered directly instead there's an assumption that I should have trawled through the tree looking for the answer. > Your suggestion is that some hypothetical iwx(4) chipset does not > support 64 bits DMA transfers. No. I said it is important to verify this. Has it now been verified? YES. Your sentence makes no sense. > OK, in such case we should follow em(4) > or re(4) way and enable 64 bits DMA transfers *only for* capable > devices: > > if (sc->hw.bus_type == em_bus_type_pci_express) > sc->sc_dmaflags |= BUS_DMA_64BIT; > /* ... */ > r = bus_dmamap_create(sc->sc_dmat, ..., sc->sc_dmaflags, ...); > /* ... */ > if (ISSET(sc->sc_dmaflags, BUS_DMA_64BIT)) > ifp->if_xflags |= IFXF_MBUF_64BIT; Yes, that is what we should do if that situation arises. > So the current sys/dev/pci/if_iwx.c which enables 64 bits DMA transfers > for all iwx(4) devices, but lefts mbufs allocation from below 4G is > wrong. What is the reason for this BUS_DMA_64BIT flag on iwx(4) if we > don't allow device to access high memory? Why iwx(4) should be special > one? Why don't we follow this way on all devices? I asked "Are we sure all the iwx devices can do this". And I will continue to ask questions like this EVERYTIME someone sends a diff which comes with text like: "This change works for my one device"