From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from bombadil.infradead.org (bombadil.infradead.org [198.137.202.133]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature ECDSA (prime256v1) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id DB135606A323 for ; Thu, 12 Nov 2026 10:14:36 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=lists.infradead.org header.i=@lists.infradead.org header.a=rsa-sha256 header.s=bombadil.20210309 header.b=d3Qg/QeM; dkim=fail reason="signature verification failed" (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.a=rsa-sha256 header.s=k20260515 header.b=MBTA1Nam DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=lists.infradead.org; s=bombadil.20210309; h=Sender: Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-Type:List-Subscribe:List-Help:List-Post: List-Archive:List-Unsubscribe:List-Id:MIME-Version:Message-ID:Date:References :In-Reply-To:Subject:Cc:To:From:Reply-To:Content-ID:Content-Description: Resent-Date:Resent-From:Resent-Sender:Resent-To:Resent-Cc:Resent-Message-ID: List-Unsubscribe-Post:List-Owner; bh=f5UTyIfmolsL7O9ZmZyq0uOTGT7D9jb2a0lnYDTYyuY=; b=d3Qg/QeMKE+abxQqBXsa5e0nwf QzXs5AzwhyZoBibD/8barRVcqLGY/nt7RjfqbBBilyWdtGMC6di0OAORThDF7M3Aein7Fx0gtVAcE NxFe6klf2Svgwk8UFllSYnwMtPknFeJFLL6IbOhiD972g5V5K7Sfr1eOEyHVW4P9bKNrpYOKj3SGV tooyfhjX0cx3Fr66NZTmNDnPxH6a/FbZeOo8ZpMkbr3vmuXzGGOC/FLrBjtO1VmfnYG5RW5oyV1hQ wVUs4SeZxoW4s+V3Czb6RwxyMyD4WwU9LTpBi0al2CrLWvJJUm7+M3H9LkqRf76UXHEwuepcC3/K9 Ckfbq5+A==; Received: from localhost ([::1] helo=bombadil.infradead.org) by bombadil.infradead.org with esmtp (Exim 4.100.1 #2 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1xRRp2-00000009U0t-43CJ; Thu, 12 Nov 2026 10:14:24 +0000 Received: from tor.source.kernel.org ([2600:3c04:e001:324:0:1991:8:25]) by bombadil.infradead.org with esmtps (Exim 4.100.1 #2 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1xRRox-00000009U09-1FcI; Thu, 12 Nov 2026 10:14:19 +0000 Received: from smtp.kernel.org (quasi.space.kernel.org [100.103.45.18]) by tor.source.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 574F36348B; Thu, 12 Nov 2026 10:14:18 +0000 (UTC) Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 9EF6C1F00A05; Thu, 12 Nov 2026 10:14:02 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=kernel.org; s=k20260515; t=1794478458; bh=Y6qGWFGnpPL1ZkxmjT2jfKkaXhHx34ppHOpZ4kDJJ7I=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:Date; b=MBTA1NamdzwTkZFr1duA2LSuyBzBxb6sNOwn0iO8KEGEo5pBXxgtCA30N+7GE/2Pw GLLvMwMZMI+da7JzcTnuS0bMCdJanR2u9J/lPT9ckfrvKZNg8LhcDu8V7C+TbIeSjw 8yAMG4KCQ37LswDNHi5a/WIuQLaVB3XmEBALQQYzAaV+Q8iEdtJJ3Dxcj6qOxTLYnK jVkJEIC1HFd3EBLbKlThHyGFKsjs0LGuM/niOEOMAHspsHAU9Gpim1bszdlXVU+ehU fummkjIScD+yhHq9nloKuZ6lIpGJGM30bseMr702s+Ru+2cT98q/Bl763g0e0qb8DX 66KW6Lsjq8WcA== X-Mailer: emacs 31.1 (via feedmail 11-beta-1 I) From: Aneesh Kumar K.V To: Kohei Enju Cc: Catalin Marinas , Will Deacon , iommu@lists.linux.dev, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Robin Murphy , Marek Szyprowski , Jonathan Corbet , Shuah Khan , Randy Dunlap , Mark Rutland , Marc Zyngier , Steven Price , Suzuki K Poulose , Jiri Pirko , Jason Gunthorpe , Mostafa Saleh , Petr Tesarik , Alexey Kardashevskiy , Dan Williams , Xu Yilun , Madhavan Srinivasan , Michael Ellerman , Nicholas Piggin , "Christophe Leroy (CS GROUP)" , "Ritesh Harjani (IBM)" , Shrikanth Hegde , Alexander Gordeev , Gerald Schaefer , Heiko Carstens , Vasily Gorbik , Christian Borntraeger , Sven Schnelle , Stefano Stabellini , Russell King , Huacai Chen , WANG Xuerui , Thomas Bogendoerfer , Jiaxun Yang , Paul Walmsley , Palmer Dabbelt , Albert Ou , Alexandre Ghiti , Andy Lutomirski , Peter Zijlstra , Thomas Gleixner , Ingo Molnar , Borislav Petkov , Dave Hansen , "H. Peter Anvin" , linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, loongarch@lists.linux.dev, linux-mips@vger.kernel.org, linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org, linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org, linux-s390@vger.kernel.org, x86@kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH v6 6/8] dma: swiotlb: Centralize memory-encryption pool sizing In-Reply-To: References: <20260924060756.1325156-7-aneesh.kumar@kernel.org> Date: Thu, 12 Nov 2026 15:43:59 +0530 Message-ID: X-Archived-By: MIME-Version: 1.0 X-BeenThere: linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.34 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: "linux-riscv" X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.9 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIMWL_WL_HIGH, DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_EF,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=4.0.1 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 4.0.1 (2024-03-26) on aws-us-west-2-korg-listserv-alma10-1 Kohei Enju writes: > Hi Aneesh, > > On 11/01 09:47, Aneesh Kumar K.V wrote: > [...] >> > >> > Hi Aneesh, >> > [ ... 35 lines skipped ... ] > Overall, I would prefer the dynamic sizing approach. However, I believe > the initial pool size still matters. > > Also, as Catalin pointed out earlier in the following message: > > https://lore.kernel.org/all/ann6noRzoPLL9kDY@arm.com/ > > the arm64 adjustment also reduces the target size used for dynamic > pool allocation, since both the initial pool and dynamic allocation > currently use default_nslabs. > > I am testing the patch below to decouple the initial pool size from the > dynamic allocation target. It adds swiotlb_adjust_initial_size() for > callers that only want to reduce the initial allocation, while keeping > the existing swiotlb_adjust_size() semantics for callers that want to > adjust both sizes. > Should we instead update the logic so that reducing the swiotlb size leaves the dynamic allocation size unchanged, while increasing it also bumps the dynamic allocation size? -aneesh _______________________________________________ linux-riscv mailing list linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-riscv