From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.3 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS, USER_AGENT_SANE_1 autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 035E9C433DB for ; Wed, 13 Jan 2021 12:45:51 +0000 (UTC) Received: from lists.ozlabs.org (lists.ozlabs.org [203.11.71.2]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 025D8230FC for ; Wed, 13 Jan 2021 12:45:49 +0000 (UTC) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org 025D8230FC Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=lst.de Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=linuxppc-dev-bounces+linuxppc-dev=archiver.kernel.org@lists.ozlabs.org Received: from bilbo.ozlabs.org (lists.ozlabs.org [IPv6:2401:3900:2:1::3]) by lists.ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4DG6cT6nKWzDrQP for ; Wed, 13 Jan 2021 23:45:45 +1100 (AEDT) Authentication-Results: lists.ozlabs.org; spf=none (no SPF record) smtp.mailfrom=lst.de (client-ip=213.95.11.211; helo=verein.lst.de; envelope-from=hch@lst.de; receiver=) Authentication-Results: lists.ozlabs.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=lst.de Received: from verein.lst.de (verein.lst.de [213.95.11.211]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by lists.ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4DG6XR4GLxzDqDh for ; Wed, 13 Jan 2021 23:42:15 +1100 (AEDT) Received: by verein.lst.de (Postfix, from userid 2407) id 3EA2768B02; Wed, 13 Jan 2021 13:42:09 +0100 (CET) Date: Wed, 13 Jan 2021 13:42:09 +0100 From: Christoph Hellwig To: Claire Chang Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v3 2/6] swiotlb: Add restricted DMA pool Message-ID: <20210113124209.GA1383@lst.de> References: <20210106034124.30560-1-tientzu@chromium.org> <20210106034124.30560-3-tientzu@chromium.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20210106034124.30560-3-tientzu@chromium.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.17 (2007-11-01) X-BeenThere: linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Linux on PowerPC Developers Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Cc: heikki.krogerus@linux.intel.com, peterz@infradead.org, grant.likely@arm.com, paulus@samba.org, frowand.list@gmail.com, mingo@kernel.org, m.szyprowski@samsung.com, sstabellini@kernel.org, saravanak@google.com, joro@8bytes.org, rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com, hch@lst.de, bgolaszewski@baylibre.com, xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org, treding@nvidia.com, devicetree@vger.kernel.org, will@kernel.org, konrad.wilk@oracle.com, dan.j.williams@intel.com, linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org, robh+dt@kernel.org, boris.ostrovsky@oracle.com, andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com, jgross@suse.com, drinkcat@chromium.org, gregkh@linuxfoundation.org, rdunlap@infradead.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, tfiga@chromium.org, iommu@lists.linux-foundation.org, xypron.glpk@gmx.de, robin.murphy@arm.com, bauerman@linux.ibm.com Errors-To: linuxppc-dev-bounces+linuxppc-dev=archiver.kernel.org@lists.ozlabs.org Sender: "Linuxppc-dev" > +#ifdef CONFIG_SWIOTLB > + struct io_tlb_mem *dma_io_tlb_mem; > #endif Please add a new config option for this code instead of always building it when swiotlb is enabled. > +static int swiotlb_init_io_tlb_mem(struct io_tlb_mem *mem, phys_addr_t start, > + size_t size) Can you split the refactoring in swiotlb.c into one or more prep patches? > +static int rmem_swiotlb_device_init(struct reserved_mem *rmem, > + struct device *dev) > +{ > + struct io_tlb_mem *mem = rmem->priv; > + int ret; > + > + if (dev->dma_io_tlb_mem) > + return -EBUSY; > + > + if (!mem) { > + mem = kzalloc(sizeof(*mem), GFP_KERNEL); > + if (!mem) > + return -ENOMEM; What is the calling convention here that allows for a NULL and non-NULL private data?