From: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@rjwysocki.net>
To: Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>
Cc: Suravee Suthikulpanit <Suravee.Suthikulpanit@amd.com>,
thomas.lendacky@amd.com, linux-crypto@vger.kernel.org,
herbert@gondor.apana.org.au, arnd@arndb.de,
linaro-acpi@lists.linaro.org, will.deacon@arm.com,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, al.stone@linaro.org,
linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org, netdev@vger.kernel.org,
leo.duran@amd.com, hanjun.guo@linaro.org, msalter@redhat.com,
grant.likely@linaro.org, davem@davemloft.net,
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, lenb@kernel.org
Subject: Re: [V3 PATCH 1/5] ACPI / scan: Parse _CCA and setup device coherency
Date: Tue, 12 May 2015 03:20:04 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1664523.WMm4AqWTY5@vostro.rjw.lan> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20150511161626.GI18655@e104818-lin.cambridge.arm.com>
On Monday, May 11, 2015 05:16:27 PM Catalin Marinas wrote:
> On Fri, May 08, 2015 at 10:53:59PM +0200, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> > On Thursday, May 07, 2015 07:37:12 PM Suravee Suthikulpanit wrote:
> > > diff --git a/drivers/acpi/Kconfig b/drivers/acpi/Kconfig
> > > index ab2cbb5..7822149 100644
> > > --- a/drivers/acpi/Kconfig
> > > +++ b/drivers/acpi/Kconfig
> > > @@ -54,6 +54,12 @@ config ACPI_GENERIC_GSI
> > > config ACPI_SYSTEM_POWER_STATES_SUPPORT
> > > bool
> > >
> > > +config ACPI_CCA_REQUIRED
> > > + bool
> > > +
> > > +config ARM64_SUPPORT_ACPI_CCA_ZERO
> >
> > Hmm. I guess the Arnd's idea what to simply use CONFIG_ARM64 directly instead
> > of adding this new option.
>
> I agree.
>
> > > +static inline bool acpi_dma_is_supported(struct acpi_device *adev)
> > > +{
> > > + /**
> > > + * Currently, we mainly support _CCA=1 (i.e. is_coherent=1)
> > > + * This should be equivalent to specifyig dma-coherent for
> > > + * a device in OF.
> > > + *
> > > + * For the case when _CCA=0 (i.e. is_coherent=0 && cca_seen=1),
> > > + * we would rely on arch-specific cache maintenance for
> > > + * non-coherence DMA operations if architecture specifies
> > > + * _XXX_SUPPORT_CCA_ZERO. Otherwise, we do not support
> > > + * DMA on this device and fallback to arch-specific default
> > > + * handling.
> > > + *
> > > + * For the case when _CCA is missing (i.e. cca_seen=0) but
> > > + * platform specifies ACPI_CCA_REQUIRED, we do not support DMA,
> > > + * and fallback to arch-specific default handling.
> > > + */
> > > + return adev && (adev->flags.is_coherent ||
> > > + (adev->flags.cca_seen &&
> > > + IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_ARM64_SUPPORT_ACPI_CCA_ZERO)));
> >
> > So what exactly would be wrong with using IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_ARM64) here?
>
> I'm not sure I follow why we need to check for ARM64 here at all. Can we
> not just have something like:
>
> return adev && (!IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_ACPI_CCA_REQUIRED) ||
> adev->flags.cca_seen)
If _CCA returns 0 on non-ARM64, DMA is not supported for this device, so
in that case the function should return 'false' while the above check will
make it return 'true'.
--
I speak only for myself.
Rafael J. Wysocki, Intel Open Source Technology Center.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2015-05-12 1:20 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 17+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2015-05-08 0:37 [V3 PATCH 0/5] ACPI: Introduce support for _CCA object Suravee Suthikulpanit
2015-05-08 0:37 ` [V3 PATCH 1/5] ACPI / scan: Parse _CCA and setup device coherency Suravee Suthikulpanit
2015-05-08 20:53 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2015-05-11 16:16 ` Catalin Marinas
2015-05-12 1:20 ` Rafael J. Wysocki [this message]
2015-05-12 15:06 ` Suravee Suthikulanit
2015-05-08 0:37 ` [V3 PATCH 2/5] arm64 : Introduce support for ACPI _CCA object Suravee Suthikulpanit
2015-05-08 20:55 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2015-05-11 17:12 ` Catalin Marinas
2015-05-08 0:37 ` [V3 PATCH 3/5] device property: Introduces device_dma_is_coherent() Suravee Suthikulpanit
2015-05-08 4:12 ` santosh.shilimkar
2015-05-08 20:49 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2015-05-08 20:27 ` santosh shilimkar
2015-05-08 20:58 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2015-05-08 20:36 ` santosh shilimkar
2015-05-08 0:37 ` [V3 PATCH 4/5] crypto: ccp - Unify coherency checking logic with device_dma_is_coherent() Suravee Suthikulpanit
2015-05-08 0:37 ` [V3 PATCH 5/5] amd-xgbe: " Suravee Suthikulpanit
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=1664523.WMm4AqWTY5@vostro.rjw.lan \
--to=rjw@rjwysocki.net \
--cc=Suravee.Suthikulpanit@amd.com \
--cc=al.stone@linaro.org \
--cc=arnd@arndb.de \
--cc=catalin.marinas@arm.com \
--cc=davem@davemloft.net \
--cc=grant.likely@linaro.org \
--cc=hanjun.guo@linaro.org \
--cc=herbert@gondor.apana.org.au \
--cc=lenb@kernel.org \
--cc=leo.duran@amd.com \
--cc=linaro-acpi@lists.linaro.org \
--cc=linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-crypto@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=msalter@redhat.com \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=thomas.lendacky@amd.com \
--cc=will.deacon@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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).