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=-2.2 required=3.0 tests=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 11BEFC33C9E for ; Tue, 7 Jan 2020 10:55:03 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E664F20678 for ; Tue, 7 Jan 2020 10:55:02 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1727896AbgAGKzC (ORCPT ); Tue, 7 Jan 2020 05:55:02 -0500 Received: from verein.lst.de ([213.95.11.211]:43807 "EHLO verein.lst.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1726690AbgAGKzB (ORCPT ); Tue, 7 Jan 2020 05:55:01 -0500 Received: by verein.lst.de (Postfix, from userid 2407) id DE1FD68AFE; Tue, 7 Jan 2020 11:54:58 +0100 (CET) Date: Tue, 7 Jan 2020 11:54:58 +0100 From: Christoph Hellwig To: Robin Murphy Cc: David Rientjes , Christoph Hellwig , "Lendacky, Thomas" , "Singh, Brijesh" , "Grimm, Jon" , baekhw@google.com, "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , "iommu@lists.linux-foundation.org" Subject: Re: [rfc] dma-mapping: preallocate unencrypted DMA atomic pool Message-ID: <20200107105458.GA3139@lst.de> References: <3213a6ac-5aad-62bc-bf95-fae8ba088b9e@arm.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <3213a6ac-5aad-62bc-bf95-fae8ba088b9e@arm.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.17 (2007-11-01) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Mon, Jan 06, 2020 at 05:34:00PM +0000, Robin Murphy wrote: > On 01/01/2020 1:54 am, David Rientjes via iommu wrote: >> Christoph, Thomas, is something like this (without the diagnosic >> information included in this patch) acceptable for these allocations? >> Adding expansion support when the pool is half depleted wouldn't be *that* >> hard. >> >> Or are there alternatives we should consider? Thanks! > > Are there any platforms which require both non-cacheable remapping *and* > unencrypted remapping for distinct subsets of devices? > > If not (and I'm assuming there aren't, because otherwise this patch is > incomplete in covering only 2 of the 3 possible combinations), then > couldn't we keep things simpler by just attributing both properties to the > single "atomic pool" on the basis that one or the other will always be a > no-op? In other words, basically just tweaking the existing "!coherent" > tests to "!coherent || force_dma_unencrypted()" and doing > set_dma_unencrypted() unconditionally in atomic_pool_init(). I think that would make most sense.