From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Christoph Hellwig Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 2/4] ACPI/IORT: Set bus DMA mask as appropriate Date: Tue, 10 Jul 2018 20:04:58 +0200 Message-ID: <20180710180458.GC26285@lst.de> References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: iommu-bounces-cunTk1MwBs9QetFLy7KEm3xJsTq8ys+cHZ5vskTnxNA@public.gmane.org Errors-To: iommu-bounces-cunTk1MwBs9QetFLy7KEm3xJsTq8ys+cHZ5vskTnxNA@public.gmane.org To: Robin Murphy Cc: devicetree-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org, gregkh-hQyY1W1yCW8ekmWlsbkhG0B+6BGkLq7r@public.gmane.org, x86-DgEjT+Ai2ygdnm+yROfE0A@public.gmane.org, linux-kernel-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org, linux-acpi-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org, iommu-cunTk1MwBs9QetFLy7KEm3xJsTq8ys+cHZ5vskTnxNA@public.gmane.org, robh+dt-DgEjT+Ai2ygdnm+yROfE0A@public.gmane.org, sudeep.holla-5wv7dgnIgG8@public.gmane.org, frowand.list-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org, hch-jcswGhMUV9g@public.gmane.org, linux-arm-kernel-IAPFreCvJWM7uuMidbF8XUB+6BGkLq7r@public.gmane.org List-Id: linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org On Tue, Jul 10, 2018 at 06:17:17PM +0100, Robin Murphy wrote: > When an explicit DMA limit is described by firmware, we need to remember > it regardless of how drivers might subsequently update their devices' > masks. The new bus_dma_mask field does that. Shouldn't we also stop presetting the dma mask after this? From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: hch@lst.de (Christoph Hellwig) Date: Tue, 10 Jul 2018 20:04:58 +0200 Subject: [RFC PATCH 2/4] ACPI/IORT: Set bus DMA mask as appropriate In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20180710180458.GC26285@lst.de> To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org On Tue, Jul 10, 2018 at 06:17:17PM +0100, Robin Murphy wrote: > When an explicit DMA limit is described by firmware, we need to remember > it regardless of how drivers might subsequently update their devices' > masks. The new bus_dma_mask field does that. Shouldn't we also stop presetting the dma mask after this? From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.3 required=3.0 tests=HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_PASS,USER_AGENT_MUTT autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5F229C5CFE7 for ; Tue, 10 Jul 2018 18:18:44 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0D5B420877 for ; Tue, 10 Jul 2018 18:18:44 +0000 (UTC) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org 0D5B420877 Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=lst.de Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=none smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1732488AbeGJSSt (ORCPT ); Tue, 10 Jul 2018 14:18:49 -0400 Received: from verein.lst.de ([213.95.11.211]:49075 "EHLO newverein.lst.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1732266AbeGJSSs (ORCPT ); Tue, 10 Jul 2018 14:18:48 -0400 Received: by newverein.lst.de (Postfix, from userid 2407) id 9A57B68D5B; Tue, 10 Jul 2018 20:04:58 +0200 (CEST) Date: Tue, 10 Jul 2018 20:04:58 +0200 From: Christoph Hellwig To: Robin Murphy Cc: hch@lst.de, m.szyprowski@samsung.com, iommu@lists.linux-foundation.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org, devicetree@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, lorenzo.pieralisi@arm.com, hanjun.guo@linaro.org, sudeep.holla@arm.com, robh+dt@kernel.org, frowand.list@gmail.com, gregkh@linuxfoundation.org, joro@8bytes.org, x86@kernel.org Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 2/4] ACPI/IORT: Set bus DMA mask as appropriate Message-ID: <20180710180458.GC26285@lst.de> References: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.17 (2007-11-01) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Tue, Jul 10, 2018 at 06:17:17PM +0100, Robin Murphy wrote: > When an explicit DMA limit is described by firmware, we need to remember > it regardless of how drivers might subsequently update their devices' > masks. The new bus_dma_mask field does that. Shouldn't we also stop presetting the dma mask after this?