Re: [Linux-nvdimm] [PATCH 04/21] nd: create an 'nd_bus' from an 'nfit_desc'

[Toshi Kani]

On Wed, 2015-04-22 at 11:20 -0700, Dan Williams wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 22, 2015 at 11:00 AM, Linda Knippers <linda.knippers@xxxxxx> wrote:
> > On 4/22/2015 1:03 PM, Dan Williams wrote:
> >> On Wed, Apr 22, 2015 at 9:39 AM, Toshi Kani <toshi.kani@xxxxxx> wrote:
> >>> On Tue, 2015-04-21 at 13:35 -0700, Dan Williams wrote:
> >>>> On Tue, Apr 21, 2015 at 12:55 PM, Toshi Kani <toshi.kani@xxxxxx> wrote:
> >>>>> On Tue, 2015-04-21 at 12:58 -0700, Dan Williams wrote:
> >>>>>> On Tue, Apr 21, 2015 at 12:35 PM, Toshi Kani <toshi.kani@xxxxxx> wrote:
> >>>>>>> On Fri, 2015-04-17 at 21:35 -0400, Dan Williams wrote:
> >>>>>>>  :
> >>>>>>>> +
> >>>>>>>> +static int nd_mem_init(struct nd_bus *nd_bus)
> >>>>>>>> +{
> >>>>>>>> +     struct nd_spa *nd_spa;
> >>>>>>>> +
> >>>>>>>> +     /*
> >>>>>>>> +      * For each SPA-DCR address range find its corresponding
> >>>>>>>> +      * MEMDEV(s).  From each MEMDEV find the corresponding DCR.
> >>>>>>>> +      * Then, try to find a SPA-BDW and a corresponding BDW that
> >>>>>>>> +      * references the DCR.  Throw it all into an nd_mem object.
> >>>>>>>> +      * Note, that BDWs are optional.
> >>>>>>>> +      */
> >>>>>>>> +     list_for_each_entry(nd_spa, &nd_bus->spas, list) {
> >>>>>>>> +             u16 spa_index = readw(&nd_spa->nfit_spa->spa_index);
> >>>>>>>> +             int type = nfit_spa_type(nd_spa->nfit_spa);
> >>>>>>>> +             struct nd_mem *nd_mem, *found;
> >>>>>>>> +             struct nd_memdev *nd_memdev;
> >>>>>>>> +             u16 dcr_index;
> >>>>>>>> +
> >>>>>>>> +             if (type != NFIT_SPA_DCR)
> >>>>>>>> +                     continue;
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> This function requires NFIT_SPA_DCR, SPA Range Structure with NVDIMM
> >>>>>>> Control Region GUID, for initializing an nd_mem object.  However,
> >>>>>>> battery-backed DIMMs do not have such control region SPA.  IIUC, the
> >>>>>>> NFIT spec does not require NFIT_SPA_DCR.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Can you change this function to work with NFIT_SPA_PM as well?
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> NFIT_SPA_PM ranges are handled separately from nd_mem_init().  See
> >>>>>> nd_region_create() in patch 10.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> If nd_mem_init() does not initialize nd_mem objects, nd_bus_probe() in
> >>>>> core.c fails in nd_bus_init_interleave_sets() and skips all subsequent
> >>>>> nd_bus_xxx() calls.  So, nd_region_create() won't be called.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> nd_bus_init_interleave_sets() fails because init_interleave_set()
> >>>>> returns -ENODEV if (!nd_mem).
> >>>>
> >>>> Ah, ok  your test case is specifying PMEM backed by memory device
> >>>> info.  We have a test case for simple ranges (nfit_test1_setup()), but
> >>>> it doesn't hit this bug because it does not specify any memory-device
> >>>> tables.
> >>>
> >>> Yes, we have NFIT table with SPA range (PM), memory device to SPA, and
> >>> NVDIMM control region structures.  With the memory device to SPA
> >>> structure, this code requires full sets of information, including the
> >>> namespace label data in _DSM [1], which is outside of ACPI 6.0 and is
> >>> optional.  Battery-backed DIMMs do not have such label data.
> >>
> >> This is what "nd_namespace_io" devices are for, they do not require labels.
> >>
> >> Question, if you don't have labels and you don't have DSMs then why
> >> publish a MEMDEV table at all?  Why not simply publish an anonymous
> >> range?  See nfit_test1_setup().
> >
> > The MEMDEV table provides useful information, and there may be _DSMs,
> > perhaps just not the same _DSM as some other devices.
> >
> >>> It needs
> >>> to work with NFIT table with these structures without this _DSM or with
> >>> a different type of _DSM which this code may or may not need to support.
> >>> It should also check Region Format Interface Code (RFIC) in the NVDIMM
> >>> control region structure before assuming this _DSM is present to
> >>> implement RFIC 0x0201.
> >>
> >> Ok I can look into adding this check, but I don't think it is
> >> necessary if you simply refrain from publishing a MEMDEV entry.
> >
> > But we need the MEMDEV. And as Toshi mentions, we could have other
> > RFICs with other _DSMs than your example.  That's why there is an RFIC.
> 
> Wait, point of clarification, DCRs (dimm-control-regions) have RFICs,
> not MEMDEVs (memory-device-to-spa-mapping).  Toshi's original report
> was that an NFIT with a SPA+MEMDEV was failing to enable a PMEM
> device.  That specific problem can be fixed by either deleting the
> MEMDEV, or adding a DCR.

By a DCR, do you mean a DCR structure or SPA with Control Region GUID?
Adding a DCR structure does not solve this issue since it requires SPA
with Control Region GUID, which battery-backed DIMMs do not have.

> Of course, if you add a DCR with a different intended DSM layout than
> the DSM-example-interface the driver will need to add support for
> handling that case.

Yes, we consider to add different _DSMs for management.  We do not need
the nd_acpi driver to support it now, but we need this framework to work
without the DSM-example-interface present.

Thanks,
-Toshi




--
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/