netdev.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
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.

  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).