From: Leon Romanovsky <leon@kernel.org>
To: Keith Busch <kbusch@kernel.org>
Cc: Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>, Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk>,
Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@nvidia.com>,
linux-block@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
linux-nvme@lists.infradead.org, Sagi Grimberg <sagi@grimberg.me>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/4] blk-mq-dma: unify DMA unmap routine
Date: Mon, 13 Oct 2025 22:35:25 +0300 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20251013193525.GD14552@unreal> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <aO1Ku5DCIMVRirdu@kbusch-mbp>
On Mon, Oct 13, 2025 at 12:53:47PM -0600, Keith Busch wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 13, 2025 at 06:34:10PM +0300, Leon Romanovsky wrote:
> > +bool blk_rq_dma_unmap(struct request *req, struct device *dma_dev,
> > + struct dma_iova_state *state, size_t mapped_len)
> > +{
> > + struct bio_integrity_payload *bip = bio_integrity(req->bio);
> > +
> > + if ((!bip && req->cmd_flags & REQ_P2PDMA) ||
> > + bio_integrity_flagged(req->bio, BIP_P2P_DMA))
> > + return true;
>
> I don't think you can unify it at this part here because the data
> payload might not be P2P but the integrity payload could be. The data
> payload needs to proceed to the next unmapping step in that case, but
> this change would have it return true early.
I was under wrong impression that request has or data payload or
integrity, but never both :(.
Thanks
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2025-10-13 19:35 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 15+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2025-10-13 15:34 [PATCH 0/4] Properly take MMIO path Leon Romanovsky
2025-10-13 15:34 ` [PATCH 1/4] blk-mq-dma: migrate to dma_map_phys instead of map_page Leon Romanovsky
2025-10-15 4:16 ` Christoph Hellwig
2025-10-13 15:34 ` [PATCH 2/4] blk-mq-dma: unify DMA unmap routine Leon Romanovsky
2025-10-13 18:53 ` Keith Busch
2025-10-13 19:35 ` Leon Romanovsky [this message]
2025-10-13 15:34 ` [PATCH 3/4] block-dma: properly take MMIO path Leon Romanovsky
2025-10-13 19:01 ` Keith Busch
2025-10-13 19:29 ` Leon Romanovsky
2025-10-13 19:34 ` Keith Busch
2025-10-15 4:18 ` Christoph Hellwig
2025-10-13 15:34 ` [PATCH 4/4] nvme-pci: unmap MMIO pages with appropriate interface Leon Romanovsky
2025-10-15 4:20 ` Christoph Hellwig
2025-10-15 6:44 ` Leon Romanovsky
2025-10-14 11:26 ` [PATCH 0/4] Properly take MMIO path shinichiro.kawasaki
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=20251013193525.GD14552@unreal \
--to=leon@kernel.org \
--cc=axboe@kernel.dk \
--cc=hch@lst.de \
--cc=jgg@nvidia.com \
--cc=kbusch@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-block@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-nvme@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=sagi@grimberg.me \
/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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).