From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from newverein.lst.de (verein.lst.de [213.95.11.211]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by lists.ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 42LfDK0qj4zDqCK for ; Fri, 28 Sep 2018 01:41:20 +1000 (AEST) Date: Thu, 27 Sep 2018 17:41:17 +0200 From: Christoph Hellwig To: Robin Murphy Cc: Christoph Hellwig , iommu@lists.linux-foundation.org, Marek Szyprowski , Benjamin Herrenschmidt , Greg Kroah-Hartman , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/5] dma-direct: refine dma_direct_alloc zone selection Message-ID: <20180927154117.GA10956@lst.de> References: <20180920185247.20037-1-hch@lst.de> <20180920185247.20037-4-hch@lst.de> <20180927153028.GD10566@lst.de> <2b98d7b2-bf74-ccc9-881a-a91e2c9949c3@arm.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii In-Reply-To: <2b98d7b2-bf74-ccc9-881a-a91e2c9949c3@arm.com> List-Id: Linux on PowerPC Developers Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , On Thu, Sep 27, 2018 at 04:38:31PM +0100, Robin Murphy wrote: > On 27/09/18 16:30, Christoph Hellwig wrote: >> On Thu, Sep 27, 2018 at 03:30:20PM +0100, Robin Murphy wrote: >>>> +static gfp_t __dma_direct_optimal_gfp_mask(struct device *dev, u64 >>>> dma_mask, >>>> + u64 *phys_mask) >>>> +{ >>>> + if (force_dma_unencrypted()) >>>> + *phys_mask = __dma_to_phys(dev, dma_mask); >>>> + else >>>> + *phys_mask = dma_to_phys(dev, dma_mask); >>> >>> Maybe make phys_to_dma_direct() take u64 instead of phys_addr_t so we can >>> reuse it here? >> >> This is a dma_to_phys and not a phys_to_dma. > > Ugh, clearly it's time to stop reviewing patches for today... sorry :( I actually made the same mistake when writing it.. ALthough I'd really like to see some feedback from you on the arm64 swiotlb series once you had more cofee ;-)