[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20230926094616.GA14877@lst.de>
Date: Tue, 26 Sep 2023 11:46:16 +0200
From: Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>
To: Robin Murphy <robin.murphy@....com>
Cc: Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>, 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 Tue, Sep 26, 2023 at 09:21:15AM +0100, Robin Murphy wrote:
> 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).
Let's just extent dma_alloc_noncontiguous with a max_dma_segments
parameter instead of adding yet another API.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists