From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: skannan@codeaurora.org (Saravana Kannan) Date: Fri, 17 Dec 2010 03:09:18 -0800 (PST) Subject: [PATCH] arm: dma-mapping: move consistent_init to early_initcall In-Reply-To: <20101217105657.GB9937@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk> References: <4CFDD297.4020600@codeaurora.org> <15d23d63900e4545a40555961c49c421.squirrel@codeaurora.org> <20101209103835.GA31465@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk> <4D017B45.4000805@codeaurora.org> <4D045692.4050607@codeaurora.org> <8c67e174d807416f0c6c190cc72d3f5a.squirrel@www.codeaurora.org> <20101217094818.GA9937@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk> <99eb693af85e07b01d81d45f1bc77f64.squirrel@www.codeaurora.org> <20101217105657.GB9937@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk> Message-ID: <6149a450170fa5fe32b271d2db0ec81b.squirrel@www.codeaurora.org> To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org > On Fri, Dec 17, 2010 at 02:26:44AM -0800, Saravana Kannan wrote: >> After Catalin's response to clarify, if we still end up not treating >> secure domain as a "DMA device", then what's the alternative? Can we get >> an explicit "cache invalidate API" that's outside of the DMA APIs? Or a >> general uncached pages alloc/free APIs? > > The answer _always_ is that if the existing APIs don't give you want > you need, then either the APIs need extending or a new API needs to > be created. I will wait to hear Catalin's clarification before I proceed further with this point. > > In any case, have you looked at the latest set of SCM patches? They > don't make use of DMA coherent memory anymore, so the problem would > seem to be resolved. > Yes, I saw them and even pointed out a few issues during internal-prelim review. The new patches get around it with what we hope is a temporary solution -- implement cache invalidate in assembly and call it over a kmalloc'ed and page aligned memory. -Saravana -- Sent by an employee of the Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. The Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of the Code Aurora Forum.