From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Christoph Hellwig Subject: Re: [PATCH 05/28] media/v4l2: remove V4L2-FLAG-MEMORY-NON-CONSISTENT Date: Thu, 20 Aug 2020 06:52:01 +0200 Message-ID: <20200820045201.GB4570@lst.de> References: <20200819065555.1802761-1-hch@lst.de> <20200819065555.1802761-6-hch@lst.de> <62e4f4fc-c8a5-3ee8-c576-fe7178cb4356@arm.com> <2b32f1d8-16f7-3352-40a5-420993d52fb5@arm.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Sender: linux-mips-owner@vger.kernel.org To: Tomasz Figa Cc: Robin Murphy , Christoph Hellwig , alsa-devel@alsa-project.org, linux-ia64@vger.kernel.org, Linux Doc Mailing List , nouveau@lists.freedesktop.org, linux-nvme@lists.infradead.org, Linux Kernel Mailing List , "James E.J. Bottomley" , linux-mm@kvack.org, Marek Szyprowski , linux-samsung-soc , Joonyoung Shim , linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org, Kyungmin Park , Ben Skeggs , Matt Porter , Linux Media Mailing List , Tom Lendacky List-Id: nouveau.vger.kernel.org On Wed, Aug 19, 2020 at 04:22:29PM +0200, Tomasz Figa wrote: > > > FWIW, I asked back in time what the plan is for non-coherent > > > allocations and it seemed like DMA_ATTR_NON_CONSISTENT and > > > dma_sync_*() was supposed to be the right thing to go with. [2] The > > > same thread also explains why dma_alloc_pages() isn't suitable for the > > > users of dma_alloc_attrs() and DMA_ATTR_NON_CONSISTENT. > > > > AFAICS even back then Christoph was implying getting rid of > > NON_CONSISTENT and *replacing* it with something streaming-API-based - > > That's not how I read his reply from the thread I pointed to, but that > might of course be my misunderstanding. Yes. Without changes like in this series just calling dma_sync_single_* will break in various cases, e.g. because dma_alloc_attrs returns memory remapped in the vmalloc space, and the dma_sync_single_* implementation implementation can't cope with vmalloc addresses.