[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20150824132630.814fe743f051d49531bb7a17@linux-foundation.org>
Date: Mon, 24 Aug 2015 13:26:30 -0700
From: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
To: Jens Axboe <axboe@...nel.dk>
Cc: Robert Jarzmik <robert.jarzmik@...e.fr>,
Russell King - ARM Linux <linux@....linux.org.uk>,
Guennadi Liakhovetski <g.liakhovetski@....de>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Mauro Carvalho Chehab <mchehab@....samsung.com>,
linux-media@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] lib: scatterlist: add sg splitting function
On Mon, 24 Aug 2015 14:15:08 -0600 Jens Axboe <axboe@...nel.dk> wrote:
> On 08/08/2015 02:44 AM, Robert Jarzmik wrote:
> > Sometimes a scatter-gather has to be split into several chunks, or sub
> > scatter lists. This happens for example if a scatter list will be
> > handled by multiple DMA channels, each one filling a part of it.
> >
> > A concrete example comes with the media V4L2 API, where the scatter list
> > is allocated from userspace to hold an image, regardless of the
> > knowledge of how many DMAs will fill it :
> > - in a simple RGB565 case, one DMA will pump data from the camera ISP
> > to memory
> > - in the trickier YUV422 case, 3 DMAs will pump data from the camera
> > ISP pipes, one for pipe Y, one for pipe U and one for pipe V
> >
> > For these cases, it is necessary to split the original scatter list into
> > multiple scatter lists, which is the purpose of this patch.
> >
> > The guarantees that are required for this patch are :
> > - the intersection of spans of any couple of resulting scatter lists is
> > empty.
> > - the union of spans of all resulting scatter lists is a subrange of
> > the span of the original scatter list.
> > - streaming DMA API operations (mapping, unmapping) should not happen
> > both on both the resulting and the original scatter list. It's either
> > the first or the later ones.
> > - the caller is reponsible to call kfree() on the resulting
> > scatterlists.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Robert Jarzmik <robert.jarzmik@...e.fr>
>
> I think this looks fine. But do we really need the Kconfig option? It's
> not a lot of code, and it seems silly to put the onus on the driver for
> having to enable something that is a subset of the SG api.
Blame me for that. It's so that all kernels don't need to carry a lump
of code which only a small number of media drivers actually use.
The tradeoff is a bit of once-off build-time effort versus a permanent
runtime gain for many systems. That's a good tradeoff.
--
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