From owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG  Fri Jan  8 14:14:38 2010
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG>
Delivered-To: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org
Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4B05F1065670
	for <freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org>; Fri,  8 Jan 2010 14:14:38 +0000 (UTC)
	(envelope-from tinguely@casselton.net)
Received: from casselton.net (casselton.net [63.165.140.2])
	by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 072DB8FC15
	for <freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org>; Fri,  8 Jan 2010 14:14:37 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from casselton.net (localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by casselton.net (8.14.3/8.14.3) with ESMTP id o08EEaar053149;
	Fri, 8 Jan 2010 08:14:36 -0600 (CST)
	(envelope-from tinguely@casselton.net)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=casselton.net;
	s=ccnMail; t=1262960077;
	bh=7hdP1o7tbkuEyU9slUmlkuTMW0JCB08bfW7DM105mYY=;
	h=Date:From:Message-Id:To:Subject:Cc:In-Reply-To;
	b=L9EUoxaJREt5eM8knriXcJ4auY/T09HctmxWe9GtkH5SJnZTX70engtSfzPGZQVRq
	/PhtIePZWC/hj2vzPSYG40jHy+iPJh+n6HWlqSDv6QB5/udRibuGD1cF4G/pB6qy7C
	aDqpPL/gjiaFxd/YCksCGApLYPCNAHGvQ1I8REA8=
Received: (from tinguely@localhost)
	by casselton.net (8.14.3/8.14.2/Submit) id o08EEaBM053148;
	Fri, 8 Jan 2010 08:14:36 -0600 (CST) (envelope-from tinguely)
Date: Fri, 8 Jan 2010 08:14:36 -0600 (CST)
From: Mark Tinguely <tinguely@casselton.net>
Message-Id: <201001081414.o08EEaBM053148@casselton.net>
To: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org, jhb@freebsd.org
In-Reply-To: <201001080833.49246.jhb@freebsd.org>
X-Greylist: Sender IP whitelisted, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.3.2
	(casselton.net [127.0.0.1]); Fri, 08 Jan 2010 08:14:37 -0600 (CST)
X-Mailman-Approved-At: Fri, 08 Jan 2010 14:22:55 +0000
Cc: tinguely@casselton.net
Subject: Re: bus_dmamap_load_uio() and user data
X-BeenThere: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
List-Id: Technical Discussions relating to FreeBSD
	<freebsd-hackers.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers>, 
	<mailto:freebsd-hackers-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-hackers>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-hackers-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers>,
	<mailto:freebsd-hackers-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 08 Jan 2010 14:14:38 -0000

>  You should use the pmap from the thread in the uio structure.  Similar to
>  this from the x86 bus_dma code:
>
>          if (uio->uio_segflg == UIO_USERSPACE) {
>                  KASSERT(uio->uio_td != NULL,
>                          ("bus_dmamap_load_uio: USERSPACE but no proc"));
>                  pmap = vmspace_pmap(uio->uio_td->td_proc->p_vmspace);
>          } else
>                  pmap = NULL;
>
>  Later when doing VA -> PA conversions the code does this:
>
>                          if (pmap)
>                                  paddr = pmap_extract(pmap, vaddr);
>                          else
>                                  paddr = pmap_kextract(vaddr);
>

We do that, but I notice that all the architecture that implement
bounce buffers assume the VA is in the current map. Most of the
addresses are KVA, but bus_dmamap_load_uio() can be in the user space.

I was wondering about the sequence:

 bus_dmamap_load_uio() user space
   dma_load_buffer()
     add bounce page save UVA (in caller user map)

later:

 bus_dma_sync
   copies bounce buffer from saved UVA. <- here is my concern. The user pmap
	is not remembered use current pmap.

Since the bounce buffer copy routines have been running in other architectures
for years without corruption, I was wondering we can safely assume that the
dma sync is running in the same thread/address space as the bus_dmamap_load_uio
call. I was hoping you would say, don't worry the scheduler would always
reload the same thread to execute the dma sync code ...

Thank-you,

--Mark Tinguely