[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20141205192544.GY11285@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk>
Date: Fri, 5 Dec 2014 19:25:44 +0000
From: Russell King - ARM Linux <linux@....linux.org.uk>
To: Arend van Spriel <arend@...adcom.com>
Cc: Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@....com>,
Hante Meuleman <meuleman@...adcom.com>,
linux-wireless <linux-wireless@...r.kernel.org>,
brcm80211-dev-list <brcm80211-dev-list@...adcom.com>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Will Deacon <Will.Deacon@....com>,
David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>,
"linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org"
<linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
Marek Szyprowski <m.szyprowski@...sung.com>
Subject: Re: using DMA-API on ARM
On Fri, Dec 05, 2014 at 08:22:05PM +0100, Arend van Spriel wrote:
> On 12/05/14 19:28, Catalin Marinas wrote:
> >This is solved by using a pre-allocated, pre-mapped atomic_pool which
> >avoids any further mapping. __dma_alloc() calls __alloc_from_pool() when
> >!__GFP_WAIT.
>
> So we are actually calling dma_alloc_coherent() with GFP_KERNEL during
> device probe. That last paragraph Russell pointed out seems to suggest this
> is not allowed.
device probe is a schedulable, sleepable context, so dma_alloc_coherent()
is fine there. As Catalin points out, and as I realised after sending
them ail, it does check for __GFP_WAIT and uses a smaller atomic pool
for those allocations. This explains why no one has hit any warnings in
map_vm_area.
So, it's safe from atomic contexts after all.
--
FTTC broadband for 0.8mile line: currently at 9.5Mbps down 400kbps up
according to speedtest.net.
--
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