[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20240129061136.GD19258@lst.de>
Date: Mon, 29 Jan 2024 07:11:36 +0100
From: Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>
To: Alexander Lobakin <aleksander.lobakin@...el.com>
Cc: "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>,
Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>, Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>,
Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>,
Marek Szyprowski <m.szyprowski@...sung.com>,
Robin Murphy <robin.murphy@....com>, Joerg Roedel <joro@...tes.org>,
Will Deacon <will@...nel.org>,
Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@...nel.org>,
Magnus Karlsson <magnus.karlsson@...el.com>,
Maciej Fijalkowski <maciej.fijalkowski@...el.com>,
Alexander Duyck <alexanderduyck@...com>, bpf@...r.kernel.org,
netdev@...r.kernel.org, iommu@...ts.linux.dev,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next 1/7] dma: compile-out DMA sync op calls when
not used
On Fri, Jan 26, 2024 at 02:54:50PM +0100, Alexander Lobakin wrote:
> Some platforms do have DMA, but DMA there is always direct and coherent.
> Currently, even on such platforms DMA sync operations are compiled and
> called.
> Add a new hidden Kconfig symbol, DMA_NEED_SYNC, and set it only when
> either sync operations are needed or there is DMA ops or swiotlb
> enabled. Set dma_need_sync() and dma_skip_sync() (stub for now)
> depending on this symbol state and don't call sync ops when
> dma_skip_sync() is true.
> The change allows for future optimizations of DMA sync calls depending
> on compile-time or runtime conditions.
So the idea of compiling out the calls sounds fine to me. But what
is the point of the extra indirection through the __-prefixed calls?
And if we need that (please document it in the commit log), please
make the wrappers proper inline functions and not macros.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists