From: Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>
To: Robin Murphy <robin.murphy@arm.com>
Cc: Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>,
iommu@lists.linux-foundation.org,
Marek Szyprowski <m.szyprowski@samsung.com>,
Paul Burton <paul.burton@mips.com>,
Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>,
linux-mips@linux-mips.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/5] dma-mapping: move the dma_coherent flag to struct device
Date: Mon, 10 Sep 2018 17:47:47 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20180910154747.GA23578@lst.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <71ec3eef-54c1-f692-5a17-4302c4dd4b05@arm.com>
On Mon, Sep 10, 2018 at 04:19:30PM +0100, Robin Murphy wrote:
>> +#if defined(CONFIG_ARCH_HAS_SYNC_DMA_FOR_DEVICE) || \
>> + defined(CONFIG_ARCH_HAS_SYNC_DMA_FOR_CPU) || \
>> + defined(CONFIG_ARCH_HAS_SYNC_DMA_FOR_CPU_ALL)
>
> If we're likely to refer to it more than once, is it worth wrapping that
> condition up in something like ARCH_HAS_NONCOHERENT_DMA?
The idea is that this is basically wrapped by dev_is_dma_coherent.
But independent of the field we have a few other uses, like the
definition of dev_is_dma_coherent itself. It'll give the idea with
an additional symbol a spin.
>> index a0aa00cc909d..69630ec320be 100644
>> --- a/include/linux/dma-noncoherent.h
>> +++ b/include/linux/dma-noncoherent.h
>> @@ -4,6 +4,22 @@
>> #include <linux/dma-mapping.h>
>> +#ifdef CONFIG_ARCH_HAS_DMA_COHERENCE_H
>> +#include <asm/dma-coherence.h>
>> +#elif defined(CONFIG_ARCH_HAS_SYNC_DMA_FOR_DEVICE) || \
>> + defined(CONFIG_ARCH_HAS_SYNC_DMA_FOR_CPU) || \
>> + defined(CONFIG_ARCH_HAS_SYNC_DMA_FOR_CPU_ALL)
>> +static inline int dev_is_dma_coherent(struct device *dev)
>
> Given that it's backed by a bool and used as a bool everywhere, this (and
> its equivalents) should probably return a bool ;)
Indeed.
>> --- a/kernel/dma/Kconfig
>> +++ b/kernel/dma/Kconfig
>> @@ -13,6 +13,9 @@ config NEED_DMA_MAP_STATE
>> config ARCH_DMA_ADDR_T_64BIT
>> def_bool 64BIT || PHYS_ADDR_T_64BIT
>> +config ARCH_HAS_DMA_COHERENCE_H
>> + bool
>
> This seems a little crude - is it unbearably churny to make an
> asm-generic/dma-coherence.h implementation for everyone else?
The case of having something else than the per-device flag is rather
odd, and I hope we don't grow any new user in addition to mips.
In fact I'm already thinking of ways to get rid of it for mips by
e.g. iterating over all devices and just setting dma_coherent,
but for now I wanted to solve the more urgen issues and tackle this
later, as this unification blocks a few other things
> Nits aside, this otherwise looks sane to me for factoring out the
> equivalent Xen and arm64 DMA ops cases.
Like this? :)
http://git.infradead.org/users/hch/misc.git/shortlog/refs/heads/dma-maybe-coherent
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2018-09-10 15:43 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 16+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2018-09-10 6:05 merge dma_direct_ops and dma_noncoherent_ops v2 Christoph Hellwig
2018-09-10 6:05 ` [PATCH 1/5] MIPS: don't select DMA_MAYBE_COHERENT from DMA_PERDEV_COHERENT Christoph Hellwig
2018-09-10 6:05 ` [PATCH 2/5] dma-mapping: move the dma_coherent flag to struct device Christoph Hellwig
2018-09-10 15:19 ` Robin Murphy
2018-09-10 15:47 ` Christoph Hellwig [this message]
2018-09-10 16:06 ` Robin Murphy
2018-09-11 6:48 ` Christoph Hellwig
2018-09-11 6:58 ` Christoph Hellwig
2018-09-10 16:13 ` Greg Kroah-Hartman
2018-09-11 6:46 ` Christoph Hellwig
2018-09-11 8:19 ` Greg Kroah-Hartman
2018-09-10 6:05 ` [PATCH 3/5] dma-mapping: merge direct and noncoherent ops Christoph Hellwig
2018-09-10 6:05 ` [PATCH 4/5] dma-mapping: consolidate the dma mmap implementations Christoph Hellwig
2018-09-10 6:05 ` [PATCH 5/5] dma-mapping: support non-coherent devices in dma_common_get_sgtable Christoph Hellwig
[not found] <20180827145032.9522-1-hch@lst.de>
2018-08-27 14:50 ` [PATCH 2/5] dma-mapping: move the dma_coherent flag to struct device Christoph Hellwig
2018-08-31 20:11 ` Paul Burton
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=20180910154747.GA23578@lst.de \
--to=hch@lst.de \
--cc=gregkh@linuxfoundation.org \
--cc=iommu@lists.linux-foundation.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mips@linux-mips.org \
--cc=m.szyprowski@samsung.com \
--cc=paul.burton@mips.com \
--cc=robin.murphy@arm.com \
/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