[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <73ac6a6b-ede9-b306-6d8f-c73f22e1e8e3@linux.intel.com>
Date: Mon, 23 Nov 2020 19:40:57 +0800
From: Lu Baolu <baolu.lu@...ux.intel.com>
To: Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>
Cc: baolu.lu@...ux.intel.com, Joerg Roedel <joro@...tes.org>,
Will Deacon <will@...nel.org>, Tom Murphy <murphyt7@....ie>,
David Woodhouse <dwmw2@...radead.org>,
Ashok Raj <ashok.raj@...el.com>,
Tvrtko Ursulin <tvrtko.ursulin@...ux.intel.com>,
iommu@...ts.linux-foundation.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Logan Gunthorpe <logang@...tatee.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 3/7] iommu: Allow the dma-iommu api to use bounce
buffers
Hi Christoph,
On 2020/11/23 18:08, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
>> + /*
>> + * If both the physical buffer start address and size are
>> + * page aligned, we don't need to use a bounce page.
>> + */
>> + if (IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_SWIOTLB) && dev_is_untrusted(dev) &&
>> + iova_offset(iovad, phys | org_size)) {
>> + aligned_size = iova_align(iovad, org_size);
>> + phys = swiotlb_tbl_map_single(dev,
>> + phys_to_dma(dev, io_tlb_start),
>> + phys, org_size, aligned_size, dir, attrs);
>
> swiotlb_tbl_map_single takes one less argument in 5.10-rc now.
>
Yes. But Will's iommu/next branch is based on 5.10-rc3. I synced with
him, we agreed to keep it 5.10-rc3 and resolve this conflict when
merging it.
Best regards,
baolu
Powered by blists - more mailing lists