From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Ian.Campbell@citrix.com (Ian Campbell) Date: Sat, 25 Oct 2014 16:40:29 +0100 Subject: [PATCH v4 3/7] [RFC] arm/arm64: introduce is_dma_coherent In-Reply-To: References: <1412941908-5850-3-git-send-email-stefano.stabellini@eu.citrix.com> <20141010120702.GI7755@arm.com> <20141013125725.GA19156@arm.com> <20141024104746.GC1955@localhost> <20141024154353.GE20534@e104818-lin.cambridge.arm.com> Message-ID: <1414251629.3584.20.camel@citrix.com> To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org On Sat, 2014-10-25 at 14:29 +0100, Stefano Stabellini wrote: > > Your suggestions and looking more at the code gave me another idea, that > I think is clean and at the same time suitable for 3.18. > What do you think of the following? It is simple, self-contained and > doesn't need a new flag in struct device. of_dma_is_coherent looks to be quite expensive though (walks up the Device Tree doing strcmps on each property of each node until it finds the one it is looking for. Ian. From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751737AbaJYTGt (ORCPT ); Sat, 25 Oct 2014 15:06:49 -0400 Received: from smtp.citrix.com ([66.165.176.89]:30088 "EHLO SMTP.CITRIX.COM" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751120AbaJYTGs (ORCPT ); Sat, 25 Oct 2014 15:06:48 -0400 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.04,786,1406592000"; d="scan'208";a="184897893" Message-ID: <1414251629.3584.20.camel@citrix.com> Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 3/7] [RFC] arm/arm64: introduce is_dma_coherent From: Ian Campbell To: Stefano Stabellini CC: Catalin Marinas , Will Deacon , "xen-devel@lists.xensource.com" , "konrad.wilk@oracle.com" , "david.vrabel@citrix.com" , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , "linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org" , "linux@arm.linux.org.uk" Date: Sat, 25 Oct 2014 16:40:29 +0100 In-Reply-To: References: <1412941908-5850-3-git-send-email-stefano.stabellini@eu.citrix.com> <20141010120702.GI7755@arm.com> <20141013125725.GA19156@arm.com> <20141024104746.GC1955@localhost> <20141024154353.GE20534@e104818-lin.cambridge.arm.com> Organization: Citrix Systems, Inc. Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1" X-Mailer: Evolution 3.12.6-1 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-DLP: MIA1 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Sat, 2014-10-25 at 14:29 +0100, Stefano Stabellini wrote: > > Your suggestions and looking more at the code gave me another idea, that > I think is clean and at the same time suitable for 3.18. > What do you think of the following? It is simple, self-contained and > doesn't need a new flag in struct device. of_dma_is_coherent looks to be quite expensive though (walks up the Device Tree doing strcmps on each property of each node until it finds the one it is looking for. Ian. From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Ian Campbell Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 3/7] [RFC] arm/arm64: introduce is_dma_coherent Date: Sat, 25 Oct 2014 16:40:29 +0100 Message-ID: <1414251629.3584.20.camel@citrix.com> References: <1412941908-5850-3-git-send-email-stefano.stabellini@eu.citrix.com> <20141010120702.GI7755@arm.com> <20141013125725.GA19156@arm.com> <20141024104746.GC1955@localhost> <20141024154353.GE20534@e104818-lin.cambridge.arm.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: "linux-arm-kernel" Errors-To: linux-arm-kernel-bounces+linux-arm-kernel=m.gmane.org@lists.infradead.org To: Stefano Stabellini Cc: "xen-devel@lists.xensource.com" , "linux@arm.linux.org.uk" , "konrad.wilk@oracle.com" , Catalin Marinas , Will Deacon , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , "david.vrabel@citrix.com" , "linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org" List-Id: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org On Sat, 2014-10-25 at 14:29 +0100, Stefano Stabellini wrote: > > Your suggestions and looking more at the code gave me another idea, that > I think is clean and at the same time suitable for 3.18. > What do you think of the following? It is simple, self-contained and > doesn't need a new flag in struct device. of_dma_is_coherent looks to be quite expensive though (walks up the Device Tree doing strcmps on each property of each node until it finds the one it is looking for. Ian.