Re: [RFC/PATCH 1/4] arm64: Provide default implementation for dma_{alloc, free}_attrs

[Damian Hobson-Garcia <dhobsong@igel.co.jp>]

Hi Lars,
On 2013/04/22 15:11, Lars-Peter Clausen wrote:
> On 04/22/2013 07:09 AM, Damian Hobson-Garcia wrote:
>> Most architectures that define CONFIG_HAVE_DMA, have implementations for
>> both dma_alloc_attrs() and dma_free_attrs().  All achitectures that do
>> not define CONFIG_HAVE_DMA also have both of these definitions provided by
>> dma-mapping-broken.h.
>>
>> Add default implementations for these functions on arm64.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Damian Hobson-Garcia <dhobsong@igel.co.jp>
>> ---
>>  arch/arm64/include/asm/dma-mapping.h |    3 +++
>>  1 files changed, 3 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/arch/arm64/include/asm/dma-mapping.h b/arch/arm64/include/asm/dma-mapping.h
>> index 9947768..65ab181 100644
>> --- a/arch/arm64/include/asm/dma-mapping.h
>> +++ b/arch/arm64/include/asm/dma-mapping.h
>> @@ -81,6 +81,9 @@ static inline void dma_mark_clean(void *addr, size_t size)
>>  {
>>  }
>>  
>> +#define dma_alloc_attrs(d, s, h, f, a) dma_alloc_coherent(d, s, h, f)
>> +#define dma_free_attrs(d, s, h, f, a) dma_free_coherent(d, s, h, f)
>> +
>>  static inline void *dma_alloc_coherent(struct device *dev, size_t size,
>>  				       dma_addr_t *dma_handle, gfp_t flags)
>>  {
> 
> The other way around would be better, properly implement
> dma_{alloc,free}_attrs and implement dma_{alloc,free}_coherent on top of
> the. E.g. you are supposed to pass the attrs parameter to ops->alloc and
> ops->free instead of NULL. And it will also allow us to move
> dma_{alloc,free}_coherent to asm-generic/dma-mapping-common.h eventually.

Ok, makes sense.  I'll update this for archs that are using dma_map_ops
(arm64 and s390).

Thanks,
Damian

> 
> - Lars
> 
-- 
Damian Hobson-Garcia
IGEL Co.,Ltd
http://www.igel.co.jp