All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>
To: Alexey Kardashevskiy <aik@ozlabs.ru>
Cc: Michael Ellerman <mpe@ellerman.id.au>,
	iommu@lists.linux-foundation.org, linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org,
	Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH kernel v2 1/2] dma: Allow mixing bypass and normal IOMMU operation
Date: Tue, 27 Oct 2020 17:48:58 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20201027164858.GA30651@lst.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20201027101841.96056-2-aik@ozlabs.ru>

> +static inline bool dma_handle_direct(struct device *dev, dma_addr_t dma_handle)
> +{
> +       return dma_handle >= dev->archdata.dma_offset;
> +}

This won't compile except for powerpc, and directly accesing arch members
in common code is a bad idea.  Maybe both your helpers need to be
supplied by arch code to better abstract this out.

>  	if (dma_map_direct(dev, ops))
>  		addr = dma_direct_map_page(dev, page, offset, size, dir, attrs);
> +#ifdef CONFIG_DMA_OPS_BYPASS_BUS_LIMIT
> +	else if (dev->bus_dma_limit &&
> +		 can_map_direct(dev, (phys_addr_t) page_to_phys(page) + offset + size))
> +		addr = dma_direct_map_page(dev, page, offset, size, dir, attrs);
> +#endif

I don't think page_to_phys needs a phys_addr_t on the return value.
I'd also much prefer if we make this a little more beautiful, here
are a few suggestions:

 - hide the bus_dma_limit check inside can_map_direct, and provide a
   stub so that we can avoid the ifdef
 - use a better name for can_map_direct, and maybe also a better calling
   convention by passing the page (the sg code also has the page), and
   maybe even hide the dma_map_direct inside it.

	if (dma_map_direct(dev, ops) ||
	    arch_dma_map_page_direct(dev, page, offset, size))
		addr = dma_direct_map_page(dev, page, offset, size, dir, attrs);

>  	BUG_ON(!valid_dma_direction(dir));
>  	if (dma_map_direct(dev, ops))
>  		dma_direct_unmap_page(dev, addr, size, dir, attrs);
> +#ifdef CONFIG_DMA_OPS_BYPASS_BUS_LIMIT
> +	else if (dev->bus_dma_limit && dma_handle_direct(dev, addr + size))
> +		dma_direct_unmap_page(dev, addr, size, dir, attrs);
> +#endif

Same here.

>  	if (dma_map_direct(dev, ops))
>  		ents = dma_direct_map_sg(dev, sg, nents, dir, attrs);
> +#ifdef CONFIG_DMA_OPS_BYPASS_BUS_LIMIT
> +	else if (dev->bus_dma_limit) {
> +		struct scatterlist *s;
> +		bool direct = true;
> +		int i;
> +
> +		for_each_sg(sg, s, nents, i) {
> +			direct = can_map_direct(dev, sg_phys(s) + s->offset + s->length);
> +			if (!direct)
> +				break;
> +		}
> +		if (direct)
> +			ents = dma_direct_map_sg(dev, sg, nents, dir, attrs);
> +		else
> +			ents = ops->map_sg(dev, sg, nents, dir, attrs);
> +	}
> +#endif

This needs to go into a helper as well.  I think the same style as
above would work pretty nicely as well:

 	if (dma_map_direct(dev, ops) ||
	    arch_dma_map_sg_direct(dev, sg, nents))
 		ents = dma_direct_map_sg(dev, sg, nents, dir, attrs);
 	else
 		ents = ops->map_sg(dev, sg, nents, dir, attrs);

> +#ifdef CONFIG_DMA_OPS_BYPASS_BUS_LIMIT
> +	if (dev->bus_dma_limit) {
> +		struct scatterlist *s;
> +		bool direct = true;
> +		int i;
> +
> +		for_each_sg(sg, s, nents, i) {
> +			direct = dma_handle_direct(dev, s->dma_address + s->length);
> +			if (!direct)
> +				break;
> +		}
> +		if (direct) {
> +			dma_direct_unmap_sg(dev, sg, nents, dir, attrs);
> +			return;
> +		}
> +	}
> +#endif

One more time here..
_______________________________________________
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@lst.de>
To: Alexey Kardashevskiy <aik@ozlabs.ru>
Cc: iommu@lists.linux-foundation.org, linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org,
	Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH kernel v2 1/2] dma: Allow mixing bypass and normal IOMMU operation
Date: Tue, 27 Oct 2020 17:48:58 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20201027164858.GA30651@lst.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20201027101841.96056-2-aik@ozlabs.ru>

> +static inline bool dma_handle_direct(struct device *dev, dma_addr_t dma_handle)
> +{
> +       return dma_handle >= dev->archdata.dma_offset;
> +}

This won't compile except for powerpc, and directly accesing arch members
in common code is a bad idea.  Maybe both your helpers need to be
supplied by arch code to better abstract this out.

>  	if (dma_map_direct(dev, ops))
>  		addr = dma_direct_map_page(dev, page, offset, size, dir, attrs);
> +#ifdef CONFIG_DMA_OPS_BYPASS_BUS_LIMIT
> +	else if (dev->bus_dma_limit &&
> +		 can_map_direct(dev, (phys_addr_t) page_to_phys(page) + offset + size))
> +		addr = dma_direct_map_page(dev, page, offset, size, dir, attrs);
> +#endif

I don't think page_to_phys needs a phys_addr_t on the return value.
I'd also much prefer if we make this a little more beautiful, here
are a few suggestions:

 - hide the bus_dma_limit check inside can_map_direct, and provide a
   stub so that we can avoid the ifdef
 - use a better name for can_map_direct, and maybe also a better calling
   convention by passing the page (the sg code also has the page), and
   maybe even hide the dma_map_direct inside it.

	if (dma_map_direct(dev, ops) ||
	    arch_dma_map_page_direct(dev, page, offset, size))
		addr = dma_direct_map_page(dev, page, offset, size, dir, attrs);

>  	BUG_ON(!valid_dma_direction(dir));
>  	if (dma_map_direct(dev, ops))
>  		dma_direct_unmap_page(dev, addr, size, dir, attrs);
> +#ifdef CONFIG_DMA_OPS_BYPASS_BUS_LIMIT
> +	else if (dev->bus_dma_limit && dma_handle_direct(dev, addr + size))
> +		dma_direct_unmap_page(dev, addr, size, dir, attrs);
> +#endif

Same here.

>  	if (dma_map_direct(dev, ops))
>  		ents = dma_direct_map_sg(dev, sg, nents, dir, attrs);
> +#ifdef CONFIG_DMA_OPS_BYPASS_BUS_LIMIT
> +	else if (dev->bus_dma_limit) {
> +		struct scatterlist *s;
> +		bool direct = true;
> +		int i;
> +
> +		for_each_sg(sg, s, nents, i) {
> +			direct = can_map_direct(dev, sg_phys(s) + s->offset + s->length);
> +			if (!direct)
> +				break;
> +		}
> +		if (direct)
> +			ents = dma_direct_map_sg(dev, sg, nents, dir, attrs);
> +		else
> +			ents = ops->map_sg(dev, sg, nents, dir, attrs);
> +	}
> +#endif

This needs to go into a helper as well.  I think the same style as
above would work pretty nicely as well:

 	if (dma_map_direct(dev, ops) ||
	    arch_dma_map_sg_direct(dev, sg, nents))
 		ents = dma_direct_map_sg(dev, sg, nents, dir, attrs);
 	else
 		ents = ops->map_sg(dev, sg, nents, dir, attrs);

> +#ifdef CONFIG_DMA_OPS_BYPASS_BUS_LIMIT
> +	if (dev->bus_dma_limit) {
> +		struct scatterlist *s;
> +		bool direct = true;
> +		int i;
> +
> +		for_each_sg(sg, s, nents, i) {
> +			direct = dma_handle_direct(dev, s->dma_address + s->length);
> +			if (!direct)
> +				break;
> +		}
> +		if (direct) {
> +			dma_direct_unmap_sg(dev, sg, nents, dir, attrs);
> +			return;
> +		}
> +	}
> +#endif

One more time here..

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>
To: Alexey Kardashevskiy <aik@ozlabs.ru>
Cc: linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org, Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>,
	Michael Ellerman <mpe@ellerman.id.au>,
	iommu@lists.linux-foundation.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH kernel v2 1/2] dma: Allow mixing bypass and normal IOMMU operation
Date: Tue, 27 Oct 2020 17:48:58 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20201027164858.GA30651@lst.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20201027101841.96056-2-aik@ozlabs.ru>

> +static inline bool dma_handle_direct(struct device *dev, dma_addr_t dma_handle)
> +{
> +       return dma_handle >= dev->archdata.dma_offset;
> +}

This won't compile except for powerpc, and directly accesing arch members
in common code is a bad idea.  Maybe both your helpers need to be
supplied by arch code to better abstract this out.

>  	if (dma_map_direct(dev, ops))
>  		addr = dma_direct_map_page(dev, page, offset, size, dir, attrs);
> +#ifdef CONFIG_DMA_OPS_BYPASS_BUS_LIMIT
> +	else if (dev->bus_dma_limit &&
> +		 can_map_direct(dev, (phys_addr_t) page_to_phys(page) + offset + size))
> +		addr = dma_direct_map_page(dev, page, offset, size, dir, attrs);
> +#endif

I don't think page_to_phys needs a phys_addr_t on the return value.
I'd also much prefer if we make this a little more beautiful, here
are a few suggestions:

 - hide the bus_dma_limit check inside can_map_direct, and provide a
   stub so that we can avoid the ifdef
 - use a better name for can_map_direct, and maybe also a better calling
   convention by passing the page (the sg code also has the page), and
   maybe even hide the dma_map_direct inside it.

	if (dma_map_direct(dev, ops) ||
	    arch_dma_map_page_direct(dev, page, offset, size))
		addr = dma_direct_map_page(dev, page, offset, size, dir, attrs);

>  	BUG_ON(!valid_dma_direction(dir));
>  	if (dma_map_direct(dev, ops))
>  		dma_direct_unmap_page(dev, addr, size, dir, attrs);
> +#ifdef CONFIG_DMA_OPS_BYPASS_BUS_LIMIT
> +	else if (dev->bus_dma_limit && dma_handle_direct(dev, addr + size))
> +		dma_direct_unmap_page(dev, addr, size, dir, attrs);
> +#endif

Same here.

>  	if (dma_map_direct(dev, ops))
>  		ents = dma_direct_map_sg(dev, sg, nents, dir, attrs);
> +#ifdef CONFIG_DMA_OPS_BYPASS_BUS_LIMIT
> +	else if (dev->bus_dma_limit) {
> +		struct scatterlist *s;
> +		bool direct = true;
> +		int i;
> +
> +		for_each_sg(sg, s, nents, i) {
> +			direct = can_map_direct(dev, sg_phys(s) + s->offset + s->length);
> +			if (!direct)
> +				break;
> +		}
> +		if (direct)
> +			ents = dma_direct_map_sg(dev, sg, nents, dir, attrs);
> +		else
> +			ents = ops->map_sg(dev, sg, nents, dir, attrs);
> +	}
> +#endif

This needs to go into a helper as well.  I think the same style as
above would work pretty nicely as well:

 	if (dma_map_direct(dev, ops) ||
	    arch_dma_map_sg_direct(dev, sg, nents))
 		ents = dma_direct_map_sg(dev, sg, nents, dir, attrs);
 	else
 		ents = ops->map_sg(dev, sg, nents, dir, attrs);

> +#ifdef CONFIG_DMA_OPS_BYPASS_BUS_LIMIT
> +	if (dev->bus_dma_limit) {
> +		struct scatterlist *s;
> +		bool direct = true;
> +		int i;
> +
> +		for_each_sg(sg, s, nents, i) {
> +			direct = dma_handle_direct(dev, s->dma_address + s->length);
> +			if (!direct)
> +				break;
> +		}
> +		if (direct) {
> +			dma_direct_unmap_sg(dev, sg, nents, dir, attrs);
> +			return;
> +		}
> +	}
> +#endif

One more time here..

  reply	other threads:[~2020-10-27 16:49 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 21+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2020-10-27 10:18 [PATCH kernel v2 0/2] DMA, powerpc/dma: Fallback to dma_ops when persistent memory present Alexey Kardashevskiy
2020-10-27 10:18 ` Alexey Kardashevskiy
2020-10-27 10:18 ` Alexey Kardashevskiy
2020-10-27 10:18 ` [PATCH kernel v2 1/2] dma: Allow mixing bypass and normal IOMMU operation Alexey Kardashevskiy
2020-10-27 10:18   ` Alexey Kardashevskiy
2020-10-27 10:18   ` Alexey Kardashevskiy
2020-10-27 16:48   ` Christoph Hellwig [this message]
2020-10-27 16:48     ` Christoph Hellwig
2020-10-27 16:48     ` Christoph Hellwig
2020-10-28  6:55     ` Alexey Kardashevskiy
2020-10-28  6:55       ` Alexey Kardashevskiy
2020-10-28  6:55       ` Alexey Kardashevskiy
2020-10-28 17:21       ` Christoph Hellwig
2020-10-28 17:21         ` Christoph Hellwig
2020-10-28 17:21         ` Christoph Hellwig
2020-10-28 23:11         ` Alexey Kardashevskiy
2020-10-28 23:11           ` Alexey Kardashevskiy
2020-10-28 23:11           ` Alexey Kardashevskiy
2020-10-27 10:18 ` [PATCH kernel v2 2/2] powerpc/dma: Fallback to dma_ops when persistent memory present Alexey Kardashevskiy
2020-10-27 10:18   ` Alexey Kardashevskiy
2020-10-27 10:18   ` Alexey Kardashevskiy

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=20201027164858.GA30651@lst.de \
    --to=hch@lst.de \
    --cc=aik@ozlabs.ru \
    --cc=iommu@lists.linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org \
    --cc=mpe@ellerman.id.au \
    /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.