[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20160315082254.GE9136@infradead.org>
Date: Tue, 15 Mar 2016 01:22:54 -0700
From: Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>
To: Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>,
Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@...el.com>,
Vinod Koul <vinod.koul@...el.com>,
linux-renesas-soc@...r.kernel.org,
"linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org"
<linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"dmaengine@...r.kernel.org" <dmaengine@...r.kernel.org>,
iommu@...ts.linux-foundation.org, robin.murphy@....com,
Laurent Pinchart <laurent.pinchart@...asonboard.com>,
geert+renesas@...der.be, Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org>,
Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>, linux-arch@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 3/9] dma-mapping: add dma_{map,unmap}_resource
On Fri, Mar 11, 2016 at 01:58:46PM +0100, Niklas S?derlund wrote:
> Without an IOMMU this is easy since the phys_addr_t and dma_addr_t are
> the same and no special care is needed. However if you have a IOMMU you
> need to map the DMA slave phys_addr_t to a dma_addr_t using something
> like this. Is it not very similar to dma_map_single() where one maps
> processor virtual memory (instead if MMIO) so that it can be used with
> DMA slaves?
It's similar, but I don't think this actually works as a general case
as there are quite a few places that expect to be able to have a
struct page for a physical address. We'd at least need a very careful
audit for that case.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists