[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20200428140257.GA3433@lst.de>
Date: Tue, 28 Apr 2020 16:02:57 +0200
From: Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>
To: Marek Szyprowski <m.szyprowski@...sung.com>
Cc: dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org, iommu@...ts.linux-foundation.org,
linaro-mm-sig@...ts.linaro.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>,
Robin Murphy <robin.murphy@....com>,
Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz <b.zolnierkie@...sung.com>,
Sumit Semwal <sumit.semwal@...aro.org>,
Benjamin Gaignard <benjamin.gaignard@...aro.org>,
intel-gfx@...ts.freedesktop.org,
linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
amd-gfx@...ts.freedesktop.org, David Airlie <airlied@...ux.ie>,
Daniel Vetter <daniel@...ll.ch>
Subject: Re: [RFC 00/17] DRM: fix struct sg_table nents vs. orig_nents
misuse
On Tue, Apr 28, 2020 at 03:19:48PM +0200, Marek Szyprowski wrote:
> 1. introduce a dma_{map,sync,unmap}_sgtable() wrappers, which will use
> a proper sg_table entries and call respective DMA-mapping functions
> and adapt current code to it
That sounds reasonable to me. Those could be pretty trivial wrappers.
>
>
> 2. rename nents and orig_nents to nr_pages, nr_dmas to clearly state
> which one refers to which part of the scatterlist; I'm open for
> other names for those entries
nr_cpu_ents and nr_dma_ents might be better names, but it still would be
a whole lot of churn for little gain. I think just good wrappers like
suggested above might be more helpful.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists