[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <4d0f3de5-1d34-d998-cb55-7ce7bfaf3f49@arm.com>
Date: Tue, 26 Sep 2023 09:21:15 +0100
From: Robin Murphy <robin.murphy@....com>
To: Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>
Cc: Tomasz Figa <tfiga@...omium.org>, Fang Hui <hui.fang@....com>,
m.szyprowski@...sung.com, mchehab@...nel.org,
linux-media@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
anle.pan@....com, xuegang.liu@....com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] MA-21654 Use dma_alloc_pages in
vb2_dma_sg_alloc_compacted
On 2023-09-26 07:51, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 20, 2023 at 05:54:26PM +0100, Robin Murphy wrote:
>> As I mentioned before, I think it might make the most sense to make the
>> whole thing into a "proper" dma_alloc_sgtable() function, which can then be
>> used with dma_sync_sgtable_*() as dma_alloc_pages() is used with
>> dma_sync_single_*() (and then dma_alloc_noncontiguous() clearly falls as
>> the special in-between case).
>
> Why not just use dma_alloc_noncontiguous if the caller wants an sgtable
> anyway?
Because we don't need the restriction of the allocation being
DMA-contiguous (and thus having to fall back to physically-contiguous in
the absence of an IOMMU). That's what vb2_dma_contig already does,
whereas IIUC vb2_dma_sg is for devices which can handle genuine
scatter-gather DMA (and so are less likely to have an IOMMU, and more
likely to need the best shot at piecing together large allocations).
Thanks,
Robin.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists