[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20190927212104.GC16819@lst.de>
Date: Fri, 27 Sep 2019 23:21:04 +0200
From: Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>
To: Halil Pasic <pasic@...ux.ibm.com>
Cc: Robin Murphy <robin.murphy@....com>,
Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>, linux-s390@...r.kernel.org,
Janosch Frank <frankja@...ux.ibm.com>,
Vasily Gorbik <gor@...ux.ibm.com>,
Cornelia Huck <cohuck@...hat.com>,
Heiko Carstens <heiko.carstens@...ibm.com>,
Peter Oberparleiter <oberpar@...ux.ibm.com>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Christian Borntraeger <borntraeger@...ibm.com>,
iommu@...ts.linux-foundation.org,
Gerald Schaefer <gerald.schaefer@...ibm.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 1/3] dma-mapping: make overriding GFP_* flags arch
customizable
On Fri, Sep 27, 2019 at 02:33:14AM +0200, Halil Pasic wrote:
> Thank you for your feedback. Just to be sure we are on the same pager, I
> read commit a0be1db4304f like this:
> 1) virtio_pci_legacy needs to allocate the virtqueues so that the base
> address fits 44 bits
> 2) if 64 bit dma is possible they set coherent_dma_mask to
> DMA_BIT_MASK(44) and dma_mask to DMA_BIT_MASK(64)
> 3) since the queues get allocated with coherent allocations 1) is
> satisfied
> 4) when the streaming mappings see a buffer that is beyond
> DMA_BIT_MASK(44) then it has to treat it as not coherent memory
> and do the syncing magic (which isn't actually required, just
> a side effect of the workaround.
1-3 is correct, 4 is not. The coherent mask is a little misnamed and
doesn't have to anything with coherency. It is the mask for DMA
allocations, while the dma mask is for streaming mappings.
> I've already implemented a patch (see after the scissors line) that
> takes a similar route as commit a0be1db4304f, but I consider that a
> workaround at best. But if that is what the community wants... I have to
> get the job done one way or the other.
That patch (minus the comments about being a workaround) is what you
should have done from the beginning.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists