From: Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>
To: Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>
Cc: janghyuck.kim@samsung.com, catalin.marinas@arm.com,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, hyesoo.yu@samsung.com,
iommu@lists.linux-foundation.org,
Cho KyongHo <pullip.cho@samsung.com>,
robin.murphy@arm.com, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] dma-mapping: introduce relaxed version of dma sync
Date: Tue, 18 Aug 2020 17:10:06 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20200818161006.GA25124@infradead.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20200818100756.GA15543@willie-the-truck>
On Tue, Aug 18, 2020 at 11:07:57AM +0100, Will Deacon wrote:
> > > so I'm not sure
> > > that we should be complicating the implementation like this to try to
> > > make it "fast".
> > >
> > I agree that this patch makes the implementation of dma API a bit more
> > but I don't think this does not impact its complication seriously.
>
> It's death by a thousand cuts; this patch further fragments the architecture
> backends and leads to arm64-specific behaviour which consequently won't get
> well tested by anybody else. Now, it might be worth it, but there's not
> enough information here to make that call.
So it turns out I misread the series (*cough*, crazy long lines,
*cough*), and it does not actually expose a new API as I thought, but
it still makes a total mess of the internal interface. It turns out
that on the for cpu side we already have arch_sync_dma_for_cpu_all,
which should do all that is needed. We could do the equivalent for
the to device side, but only IFF there really is a major benefit for
something that actually is mainstream and matters.
_______________________________________________
iommu mailing list
iommu@lists.linux-foundation.org
https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/iommu
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>
To: Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>
Cc: janghyuck.kim@samsung.com, catalin.marinas@arm.com,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, hyesoo.yu@samsung.com,
iommu@lists.linux-foundation.org,
Cho KyongHo <pullip.cho@samsung.com>,
robin.murphy@arm.com, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] dma-mapping: introduce relaxed version of dma sync
Date: Tue, 18 Aug 2020 17:10:06 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20200818161006.GA25124@infradead.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20200818100756.GA15543@willie-the-truck>
On Tue, Aug 18, 2020 at 11:07:57AM +0100, Will Deacon wrote:
> > > so I'm not sure
> > > that we should be complicating the implementation like this to try to
> > > make it "fast".
> > >
> > I agree that this patch makes the implementation of dma API a bit more
> > but I don't think this does not impact its complication seriously.
>
> It's death by a thousand cuts; this patch further fragments the architecture
> backends and leads to arm64-specific behaviour which consequently won't get
> well tested by anybody else. Now, it might be worth it, but there's not
> enough information here to make that call.
So it turns out I misread the series (*cough*, crazy long lines,
*cough*), and it does not actually expose a new API as I thought, but
it still makes a total mess of the internal interface. It turns out
that on the for cpu side we already have arch_sync_dma_for_cpu_all,
which should do all that is needed. We could do the equivalent for
the to device side, but only IFF there really is a major benefit for
something that actually is mainstream and matters.
_______________________________________________
linux-arm-kernel mailing list
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>
To: Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>
Cc: Cho KyongHo <pullip.cho@samsung.com>,
janghyuck.kim@samsung.com, catalin.marinas@arm.com,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, hyesoo.yu@samsung.com,
iommu@lists.linux-foundation.org, robin.murphy@arm.com,
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] dma-mapping: introduce relaxed version of dma sync
Date: Tue, 18 Aug 2020 17:10:06 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20200818161006.GA25124@infradead.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20200818100756.GA15543@willie-the-truck>
On Tue, Aug 18, 2020 at 11:07:57AM +0100, Will Deacon wrote:
> > > so I'm not sure
> > > that we should be complicating the implementation like this to try to
> > > make it "fast".
> > >
> > I agree that this patch makes the implementation of dma API a bit more
> > but I don't think this does not impact its complication seriously.
>
> It's death by a thousand cuts; this patch further fragments the architecture
> backends and leads to arm64-specific behaviour which consequently won't get
> well tested by anybody else. Now, it might be worth it, but there's not
> enough information here to make that call.
So it turns out I misread the series (*cough*, crazy long lines,
*cough*), and it does not actually expose a new API as I thought, but
it still makes a total mess of the internal interface. It turns out
that on the for cpu side we already have arch_sync_dma_for_cpu_all,
which should do all that is needed. We could do the equivalent for
the to device side, but only IFF there really is a major benefit for
something that actually is mainstream and matters.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2020-08-18 16:10 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 30+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
[not found] <CGME20200818075050epcas2p15c780650f5f6b4a54ce731c273d24c98@epcas2p1.samsung.com>
2020-08-18 7:43 ` [PATCH 1/2] dma-mapping: introduce relaxed version of dma sync Cho KyongHo
2020-08-18 7:43 ` Cho KyongHo
2020-08-18 7:43 ` Cho KyongHo
2020-08-18 7:43 ` [PATCH 2/2] arm64: dma-mapping: add relaxed DMA sync Cho KyongHo
2020-08-18 7:43 ` Cho KyongHo
2020-08-18 7:43 ` Cho KyongHo
2020-08-18 8:28 ` [PATCH 1/2] dma-mapping: introduce relaxed version of dma sync Will Deacon
2020-08-18 8:28 ` Will Deacon
2020-08-18 8:28 ` Will Deacon
2020-08-18 8:37 ` Christoph Hellwig
2020-08-18 8:37 ` Christoph Hellwig
2020-08-18 8:37 ` Christoph Hellwig
2020-08-18 9:46 ` Cho KyongHo
2020-08-18 9:46 ` Cho KyongHo
2020-08-18 9:46 ` Cho KyongHo
2020-08-18 9:37 ` Cho KyongHo
2020-08-18 9:37 ` Cho KyongHo
2020-08-18 9:37 ` Cho KyongHo
2020-08-18 10:07 ` Will Deacon
2020-08-18 10:07 ` Will Deacon
2020-08-18 10:07 ` Will Deacon
2020-08-18 16:10 ` Christoph Hellwig [this message]
2020-08-18 16:10 ` Christoph Hellwig
2020-08-18 16:10 ` Christoph Hellwig
2020-08-19 2:01 ` Cho KyongHo
2020-08-19 2:01 ` Cho KyongHo
2020-08-19 2:01 ` Cho KyongHo
2020-08-19 1:24 ` Cho KyongHo
2020-08-19 1:24 ` Cho KyongHo
2020-08-19 1:24 ` Cho KyongHo
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20200818161006.GA25124@infradead.org \
--to=hch@infradead.org \
--cc=catalin.marinas@arm.com \
--cc=hyesoo.yu@samsung.com \
--cc=iommu@lists.linux-foundation.org \
--cc=janghyuck.kim@samsung.com \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=pullip.cho@samsung.com \
--cc=robin.murphy@arm.com \
--cc=will@kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.