[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <433dec64-ef15-b31d-ace4-4c72b81d2942@arm.com>
Date: Thu, 18 Apr 2019 17:41:00 +0100
From: Robin Murphy <robin.murphy@....com>
To: Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>
Cc: Joerg Roedel <joro@...tes.org>,
Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@....com>,
Will Deacon <will.deacon@....com>,
Tom Lendacky <thomas.lendacky@....com>,
iommu@...ts.linux-foundation.org,
linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 12/21] dma-iommu: factor atomic pool allocations into
helpers
On 18/04/2019 17:35, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 18, 2019 at 04:06:56PM +0100, Robin Murphy wrote:
>> OK, I'm still looking at mmap and get_sgtable, but for now I've pushed out
>> a partial branch that consolidates alloc and free in a way which makes
>> sense to me:
>>
>> git://linux-arm.org/linux-rm dma/rework
>>
>> Please let me know what you think.
>
> From a very high level POV this looks ok, but sometimes a bit to
> convoluted to me. The major issue why I went with the version I posted
> is that I can cleanly ifdef out the remap code in just a few sections.
> In this version it is spread out a lot more, and the use of IS_ENABLED
> means that we'd need a lot more stubs for functionality that won't
> ever be called but needs to be compilable.
What functionality do you have planned in that regard? I did do a quick
build test of my arm64 config with DMA_DIRECT_REMAP hacked out, and
dma-iommu.o appeared to link OK (although other bits of arm64 and
dma-direct didn't, as expected). I will try x86 with IOMMU_DMA to make
sure, though.
Robin.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists