[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20130426094123.GG14496@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk>
Date: Fri, 26 Apr 2013 10:41:23 +0100
From: Russell King - ARM Linux <linux@....linux.org.uk>
To: Vinod Koul <vinod.koul@...el.com>
Cc: Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org>,
Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>,
Lee Jones <lee.jones@...aro.org>,
"linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org"
<linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Linus WALLEIJ <linus.walleij@...ricsson.com>,
Herbert Xu <herbert@...dor.hengli.com.au>,
"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
Andreas Westin <andreas.westin@...ricsson.com>,
"linux-crypto@...r.kernel.org" <linux-crypto@...r.kernel.org>,
magnus.p.persson@...ricsson.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 6/9] crypto: ux500/cryp - Set DMA configuration though
dma_slave_config()
On Fri, Apr 26, 2013 at 01:46:46PM +0530, Vinod Koul wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 26, 2013 at 10:28:39AM +0200, Linus Walleij wrote:
> > On Thu, Apr 25, 2013 at 4:11 PM, Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de> wrote:
> >
> > > The dma engine driver must know the address in its dma space, while the
> > > slave driver has it available in physical space. These two are often the
> > > same, but there is no generic way to convert between the two, especially
> > > if the dma engine resides behind an IOMMU.
> > >
> > > The best assumption we can make is that the dma engine driver knows
> > > how to convert between the two. Interestingly the documentation for
> > > dma_slave_config talks about "physical address", while the structure
> > > itself uses a dma_addr_t. Linus Walleij introduced the structure in
> > > c156d0a5b0 "DMAENGINE: generic slave channel control v3", so I assume
> > > he can shed some light on what he was thinking. I assume the documentation
> > > is right but the structure is not and should be converted to use
> > > phys_add_t or resource_size_t.
> >
> > OK I could cook a patch for that, but I think I need some input from
> > Vinod and/or Russell on this.
> the dma_slave_config is physical address that should be passed directly to the
> controller. Obviosuly it should phys_addr_t :)
What you've just said is actually confusing.
"physical address" is normally the term used to describe the addresses
seen to the RAM. phys_addr_t describes this. This is not necessarily
what needs to be programmed into the DMA controller.
For RAM addresses, they must be mapped via the DMA API - and this gives
you a dma_addr_t.
"DMA address" is the address to be programmed into a DMA controller to
access a particular address in RAM or device, and has type dma_addr_t.
When you're programming a DMA controller to access a device, you are
clearly telling it the address on the _DMA controller's bus_ to access
that register, which may or may not be the same as the physical address.
There are platforms in existence where phys_addr_t can be 32-bit but
dma_addr_t can be 64-bit. Getting this stuff wrong can cause problems.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists