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=-5.2 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 5BE39C43461 for ; Fri, 11 Sep 2020 07:07:40 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 23FCA221F0 for ; Fri, 11 Sep 2020 07:07:40 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1725793AbgIKHHj (ORCPT ); Fri, 11 Sep 2020 03:07:39 -0400 Received: from verein.lst.de ([213.95.11.211]:35740 "EHLO verein.lst.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1725535AbgIKHHc (ORCPT ); Fri, 11 Sep 2020 03:07:32 -0400 Received: by verein.lst.de (Postfix, from userid 2407) id 6D8E568B02; Fri, 11 Sep 2020 09:07:30 +0200 (CEST) Date: Fri, 11 Sep 2020 09:07:30 +0200 From: Christoph Hellwig To: Hillf Danton Cc: Christoph Hellwig , Thomas Bogendoerfer , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mips@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 03/12] MIPS/jazzdma: decouple from dma-direct Message-ID: <20200911070730.GA22394@lst.de> References: <20200908164758.3177341-1-hch@lst.de> <20200910141233.10768-1-hdanton@sina.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20200910141233.10768-1-hdanton@sina.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 Thu, Sep 10, 2020 at 10:12:33PM +0800, Hillf Danton wrote: > > On Tue, 8 Sep 2020 18:47:49 +0200 Christoph Hellwig wrote: > > > > The jazzdma ops implement support for a very basic IOMMU. Thus we really > > should not use the dma-direct code that takes physical address limits > > into account. This survived through the great MIPS DMA ops cleanup mostly > > because I was lazy, but now it is time to fully split the implementations. > > A minor change in behavior, do we need to clear the dma buf as the > dma-direct code does? Yes, I've fixed this up.