Re: [PATCH 6/9] crypto: ux500/cryp - Set DMA configuration though dma_slave_config()

[Vinod Koul <vinod.koul@intel.com>]

On Fri, Apr 26, 2013 at 10:41:23AM +0100, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 26, 2013 at 01:46:46PM +0530, Vinod Koul wrote:
> > On Fri, Apr 26, 2013 at 10:28:39AM +0200, Linus Walleij wrote:
> > > On Thu, Apr 25, 2013 at 4:11 PM, Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de> wrote:
> > > 
> > > > The dma engine driver must know the address in its dma space, while the
> > > > slave driver has it available in physical space. These two are often the
> > > > same, but there is no generic way to convert between the two, especially
> > > > if the dma engine resides behind an IOMMU.
> > > >
> > > > The best assumption we can make is that the dma engine driver knows
> > > > how to convert between the two. Interestingly the documentation for
> > > > dma_slave_config talks about "physical address", while the structure
> > > > itself uses a dma_addr_t. Linus Walleij introduced the structure in
> > > > c156d0a5b0 "DMAENGINE: generic slave channel control v3", so I assume
> > > > he can shed some light on what he was thinking. I assume the documentation
> > > > is right but the structure is not and should be converted to use
> > > > phys_add_t or resource_size_t.
> > > 
> > > OK I could cook a patch for that, but I think I need some input from
> > > Vinod and/or Russell on this.
> > the dma_slave_config is physical address that should be passed directly to the
> > controller. Obviosuly it should phys_addr_t :)
> 
> What you've just said is actually confusing.
> 
> "physical address" is normally the term used to describe the addresses
> seen to the RAM.  phys_addr_t describes this.  This is not necessarily
> what needs to be programmed into the DMA controller.
Yes that would be true when you have MMU
> 
> For RAM addresses, they must be mapped via the DMA API - and this gives
> you a dma_addr_t.
> 
> "DMA address" is the address to be programmed into a DMA controller to
> access a particular address in RAM or device, and has type dma_addr_t.
> When you're programming a DMA controller to access a device, you are
> clearly telling it the address on the _DMA controller's bus_ to access
> that register, which may or may not be the same as the physical address.
> 
> There are platforms in existence where phys_addr_t can be 32-bit but
> dma_addr_t can be 64-bit.  Getting this stuff wrong can cause problems.
Sure, thanks for pointing, so we wont do this change.

--
~Vinod