From: mchehab@infradead.org (Mauro Carvalho Chehab)
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: [REVERT] Re: V4L: videobuf-dma-contig: fix mmap_mapper broken on ARM
Date: Tue, 19 Apr 2011 09:37:48 -0300 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4DAD821C.7080101@infradead.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <4DAD26D9.6060906@suse.cz>
Em 19-04-2011 03:08, Jiri Slaby escreveu:
> On 04/14/2011 12:00 AM, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote:
>> On Wed, Apr 13, 2011 at 10:56:39PM +0200, Janusz Krzysztofik wrote:
>>> Dnia ?roda 13 kwiecie? 2011 o 20:32:31 Russell King - ARM Linux
>>> napisa?(a):
>>>> On Wed, Apr 13, 2011 at 12:52:31PM +0200, Janusz Krzysztofik wrote:
>>>>> Taking into account that I'm just trying to fix a regression, and
>>>>> not invent a new, long term solution: are you able to name an ARM
>>>>> based board which a) is already supported in 2.6.39, b) is (or can
>>>>> be) equipped with a device supported by a V4L driver which uses
>>>>> videobuf- dma-config susbsystem, c) has a bus structure with which
>>>>> virt_to_phys(bus_to_virt(dma_handle)) is not equal dma_handle?
>>>>
>>>> I have no idea - and why should whether someone can name something
>>>> that may break be a justification to allow something which is
>>>> technically wrong?
>>>>
>>>> Surely it should be the other way around - if its technically wrong
>>>> and _may_ break something then it shouldn't be allowed.
>>>
>>> In theory - of course. In practice - couldn't we now, close to -rc3,
>>> relax the rules a little bit and stop bothering with something that may
>>> break in the future if it doesn't break on any board supported so far (I
>>> hope)?
>>
>> If we are worried about closeness to -final, then what should happen is
>> that the original commit is reverted; the "fix" for IOMMUs resulted in
>> a regression for existing users which isn't trivial to resolve without
>> risking possible breakage of other users.
>
> Hi, as -rc4 is out, I think it's time to revert that commit and rethink
> the mmap behaviour for some of next -rc1s.
>
> Linus, please revert
> commit 35d9f510b67b10338161aba6229d4f55b4000f5b
> Author: Jiri Slaby <jslaby@suse.cz>
> Date: Mon Feb 28 06:37:02 2011 -0300
It seems the better option for now.
Acked-by: Mauro Carvalho Chehab <mchehab@redhat.com>
>
> [media] V4L: videobuf, don't use dma addr as physical
> ===
>
> It fixes mmap when IOMMU is used on x86 only, but breaks architectures
> like ARM or PPC where virt_to_phys(dma_alloc_coherent) doesn't work. We
> need there dma_mmap_coherent or similar (the trickery what
> snd_pcm_default_mmap does but in some saner way). But this cannot be
> done at this phase.
>
> thanks,
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Mauro Carvalho Chehab <mchehab@infradead.org>
To: Jiri Slaby <jslaby@suse.cz>
Cc: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
Russell King - ARM Linux <linux@arm.linux.org.uk>,
Janusz Krzysztofik <jkrzyszt@tis.icnet.pl>,
Linux Media Mailing List <linux-media@vger.kernel.org>,
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
Jiri Slaby <jirislaby@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [REVERT] Re: V4L: videobuf-dma-contig: fix mmap_mapper broken on ARM
Date: Tue, 19 Apr 2011 09:37:48 -0300 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4DAD821C.7080101@infradead.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <4DAD26D9.6060906@suse.cz>
Em 19-04-2011 03:08, Jiri Slaby escreveu:
> On 04/14/2011 12:00 AM, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote:
>> On Wed, Apr 13, 2011 at 10:56:39PM +0200, Janusz Krzysztofik wrote:
>>> Dnia środa 13 kwiecień 2011 o 20:32:31 Russell King - ARM Linux
>>> napisał(a):
>>>> On Wed, Apr 13, 2011 at 12:52:31PM +0200, Janusz Krzysztofik wrote:
>>>>> Taking into account that I'm just trying to fix a regression, and
>>>>> not invent a new, long term solution: are you able to name an ARM
>>>>> based board which a) is already supported in 2.6.39, b) is (or can
>>>>> be) equipped with a device supported by a V4L driver which uses
>>>>> videobuf- dma-config susbsystem, c) has a bus structure with which
>>>>> virt_to_phys(bus_to_virt(dma_handle)) is not equal dma_handle?
>>>>
>>>> I have no idea - and why should whether someone can name something
>>>> that may break be a justification to allow something which is
>>>> technically wrong?
>>>>
>>>> Surely it should be the other way around - if its technically wrong
>>>> and _may_ break something then it shouldn't be allowed.
>>>
>>> In theory - of course. In practice - couldn't we now, close to -rc3,
>>> relax the rules a little bit and stop bothering with something that may
>>> break in the future if it doesn't break on any board supported so far (I
>>> hope)?
>>
>> If we are worried about closeness to -final, then what should happen is
>> that the original commit is reverted; the "fix" for IOMMUs resulted in
>> a regression for existing users which isn't trivial to resolve without
>> risking possible breakage of other users.
>
> Hi, as -rc4 is out, I think it's time to revert that commit and rethink
> the mmap behaviour for some of next -rc1s.
>
> Linus, please revert
> commit 35d9f510b67b10338161aba6229d4f55b4000f5b
> Author: Jiri Slaby <jslaby@suse.cz>
> Date: Mon Feb 28 06:37:02 2011 -0300
It seems the better option for now.
Acked-by: Mauro Carvalho Chehab <mchehab@redhat.com>
>
> [media] V4L: videobuf, don't use dma addr as physical
> ===
>
> It fixes mmap when IOMMU is used on x86 only, but breaks architectures
> like ARM or PPC where virt_to_phys(dma_alloc_coherent) doesn't work. We
> need there dma_mmap_coherent or similar (the trickery what
> snd_pcm_default_mmap does but in some saner way). But this cannot be
> done at this phase.
>
> thanks,
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2011-04-19 12:37 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 34+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2011-04-12 21:06 [PATCH 2.6.39 v2] V4L: videobuf-dma-contig: fix mmap_mapper broken on ARM Janusz Krzysztofik
2011-04-12 21:06 ` Janusz Krzysztofik
2011-04-12 21:40 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2011-04-12 21:40 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2011-04-12 22:12 ` Theodore Kilgore
2011-04-12 22:12 ` Theodore Kilgore
2011-04-13 10:52 ` Janusz Krzysztofik
2011-04-13 10:52 ` Janusz Krzysztofik
2011-04-13 18:32 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2011-04-13 18:32 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2011-04-13 20:56 ` Janusz Krzysztofik
2011-04-13 20:56 ` Janusz Krzysztofik
2011-04-13 22:00 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2011-04-13 22:00 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2011-04-13 22:43 ` Janusz Krzysztofik
2011-04-13 22:43 ` Janusz Krzysztofik
2011-04-19 6:08 ` [REVERT] " Jiri Slaby
2011-04-19 6:08 ` Jiri Slaby
2011-04-19 12:37 ` Mauro Carvalho Chehab [this message]
2011-04-19 12:37 ` Mauro Carvalho Chehab
2011-04-13 12:03 ` [PATCH 2.6.39 v2] " Sergei Shtylyov
2011-04-13 12:03 ` Sergei Shtylyov
2011-04-13 13:11 ` Janusz Krzysztofik
2011-04-13 13:11 ` Janusz Krzysztofik
2011-04-13 17:36 ` Sergei Shtylyov
2011-04-13 17:36 ` Sergei Shtylyov
2011-04-13 21:01 ` Janusz Krzysztofik
2011-04-13 21:01 ` Janusz Krzysztofik
2011-04-13 21:16 ` Janusz Krzysztofik
2011-04-13 21:16 ` Janusz Krzysztofik
2011-04-15 12:25 ` Sergei Shtylyov
2011-04-15 12:25 ` Sergei Shtylyov
2011-04-14 11:17 ` Sergei Shtylyov
2011-04-14 11:17 ` Sergei Shtylyov
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=4DAD821C.7080101@infradead.org \
--to=mchehab@infradead.org \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.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.