[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <7cfcf919-3c7d-4f0c-911f-697ea3141080@linaro.org>
Date: Mon, 16 Jun 2025 14:10:40 +0100
From: James Clark <james.clark@...aro.org>
To: Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>, Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>
Cc: olteanv@...il.com, oe-kbuild-all@...ts.linux.dev, arnd@...db.de,
larisa.grigore@....com, Frank.li@....com, linux-spi@...r.kernel.org,
imx@...ts.linux.dev, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
kernel test robot <lkp@...el.com>,
Marek Szyprowski <m.szyprowski@...sung.com>,
Robin Murphy <robin.murphy@....com>, iommu@...ts.linux.dev
Subject: Re: [PATCH] dma-mapping: Stub out dma_{alloc,free,map}_pages() API
On 16/06/2025 1:14 pm, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 16, 2025 at 01:11:49PM +0100, Mark Brown wrote:
>> already tied to a platform that needs DMA needing to add the dependency
>> which nobody is going to notice without doing build testing for
>> randconfigs or similar non-useful configs - it's not a productive use of
>> time.
>
> Stop your unproductive whining and just fix your dependencies.
The change introduces consistency with the existing declarations in
dma-mapping.h. Surely there is value in consistency and it doesn't do
any harm to define new ones with stubs the same as the other ones. That
way when you change an existing device that has DMA stuff to use a new
part of the API you don't have to predict that it will behave
differently to another part of the API.
I suppose it is possible to #ifdef out the DMA stuff in this driver, but
IMO it would be quite messy, and I don't think randomly not stubbing out
some functions is the right way to move towards fixing all the
dependencies in all drivers. We should continue with the stubs for now
and fix whole drivers one by one as a proper effort.
Thanks
James
Powered by blists - more mailing lists