Hi Hans!
On Mon, Oct 4, 2021 at 6:37 PM Hans Verkuil <hverkuil@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On 20/09/2021 19:04, Dafna Hirschfeld wrote:
From: Alexandre Courbot <acourbot@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
When running memcpy_toio:
memcpy_toio(send_obj->share_buf, buf, len);
it was found that errors appear if len is not a multiple of 8:
[58.350841] mtk-mdp 14001000.rdma: processing failed: -22
Why do errors appear? Is that due to a HW bug? Some other reason?
MTK folks would be the best placed to answer this, but since the
failure is reported by the firmware I'd suspect either a firmware or
hardware limitation.
This patch ensures the copy of a multiple of 8 size by calling
round_up(len, 8) when copying
Fixes: e6599adfad30 ("media: mtk-vpu: avoid unaligned access to DTCM buffer.")
Signed-off-by: Alexandre Courbot <acourbot@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Signed-off-by: Enric Balletbo i Serra <enric.balletbo@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Signed-off-by: Dafna Hirschfeld <dafna.hirschfeld@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Reviewed-by: Houlong Wei <houlong.wei@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
---
changes since v3:
1. multile -> multiple
2. add inline doc
changes since v2:
1. do the extra copy only if len is not multiple of 8
changes since v1:
1. change sign-off-by tags
2. change values to memset
drivers/media/platform/mtk-vpu/mtk_vpu.c | 15 ++++++++++++++-
1 file changed, 14 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/drivers/media/platform/mtk-vpu/mtk_vpu.c b/drivers/media/platform/mtk-vpu/mtk_vpu.c
index ec290dde59cf..1df031716c8f 100644
--- a/drivers/media/platform/mtk-vpu/mtk_vpu.c
+++ b/drivers/media/platform/mtk-vpu/mtk_vpu.c
@@ -349,7 +349,20 @@ int vpu_ipi_send(struct platform_device *pdev,
}
} while (vpu_cfg_readl(vpu, HOST_TO_VPU));
- memcpy_toio(send_obj->share_buf, buf, len);
+ /*
+ * when copying data to the vpu hardware, the memcpy_toio operation must copy
+ * a multiple of 8. Otherwise the processing fails
Same here: it needs to explain why the processing fails.
+ */
+ if (len % 8 != 0) {
+ unsigned char data[SHARE_BUF_SIZE];
Wouldn't it be more robust if you say:
unsigned char data[sizeof(send_obj->share_buf)];
Definitely yes.
I also think that the SHARE_BUF_SIZE define needs a comment stating that it must be a
multiple of 8, otherwise unexpected things can happen.
You also noticed that the current SHARE_BUF_SIZE define is too low, but I saw
no patch correcting this. Shouldn't that be fixed as well?
AFAICT the firmware expects this exact size on its end, so I don't
believe it can be changed that easily. But maybe someone from MTK can
prove me wrong.
Cheers,
Alex.