[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20250627170213.GL17401@unreal>
Date: Fri, 27 Jun 2025 20:02:13 +0300
From: Leon Romanovsky <leon@...nel.org>
To: Marek Szyprowski <m.szyprowski@...sung.com>
Cc: Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>, Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net>,
Madhavan Srinivasan <maddy@...ux.ibm.com>,
Michael Ellerman <mpe@...erman.id.au>,
Nicholas Piggin <npiggin@...il.com>,
Christophe Leroy <christophe.leroy@...roup.eu>,
Robin Murphy <robin.murphy@....com>, Joerg Roedel <joro@...tes.org>,
Will Deacon <will@...nel.org>,
"Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@...hat.com>,
Jason Wang <jasowang@...hat.com>,
Xuan Zhuo <xuanzhuo@...ux.alibaba.com>,
Eugenio Pérez <eperezma@...hat.com>,
Alexander Potapenko <glider@...gle.com>,
Marco Elver <elver@...gle.com>, Dmitry Vyukov <dvyukov@...gle.com>,
Masami Hiramatsu <mhiramat@...nel.org>,
Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@...icios.com>,
Jérôme Glisse <jglisse@...hat.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
linux-doc@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org, iommu@...ts.linux.dev,
virtualization@...ts.linux.dev, kasan-dev@...glegroups.com,
linux-trace-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-mm@...ck.org,
Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@...pe.ca>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/8] dma-mapping: migrate to physical address-based API
On Fri, Jun 27, 2025 at 03:44:10PM +0200, Marek Szyprowski wrote:
> On 25.06.2025 15:18, Leon Romanovsky wrote:
> > This series refactors the DMA mapping to use physical addresses
> > as the primary interface instead of page+offset parameters. This
> > change aligns the DMA API with the underlying hardware reality where
> > DMA operations work with physical addresses, not page structures.
> >
> > The series consists of 8 patches that progressively convert the DMA
> > mapping infrastructure from page-based to physical address-based APIs:
> >
> > The series maintains backward compatibility by keeping the old
> > page-based API as wrapper functions around the new physical
> > address-based implementations.
>
> Thanks for this rework! I assume that the next step is to add map_phys
> callback also to the dma_map_ops and teach various dma-mapping providers
> to use it to avoid more phys-to-page-to-phys conversions.
Probably Christoph will say yes, however I personally don't see any
benefit in this. Maybe I wrong here, but all existing .map_page()
implementation platforms don't support p2p anyway. They won't benefit
from this such conversion.
>
> I only wonder if this newly introduced dma_map_phys()/dma_unmap_phys()
> API is also suitable for the recently discussed PCI P2P DMA? While
> adding a new API maybe we should take this into account?
First, immediate user (not related to p2p) is blk layer:
https://lore.kernel.org/linux-nvme/bcdcb5eb-17ed-412f-bf5c-303079798fe2@nvidia.com/T/#m7e715697d4b2e3997622a3400243477c75cab406
+static bool blk_dma_map_direct(struct request *req, struct device *dma_dev,
+ struct blk_dma_iter *iter, struct phys_vec *vec)
+{
+ iter->addr = dma_map_page(dma_dev, phys_to_page(vec->paddr),
+ offset_in_page(vec->paddr), vec->len, rq_dma_dir(req));
+ if (dma_mapping_error(dma_dev, iter->addr)) {
+ iter->status = BLK_STS_RESOURCE;
+ return false;
+ }
+ iter->len = vec->len;
+ return true;
+}
Block layer started to store phys addresses instead of struct pages and
this phys_to_page() conversion in data-path will be avoided.
> My main concern is the lack of the source phys addr passed to the dma_unmap_phys()
> function and I'm aware that this might complicate a bit code conversion
> from old dma_map/unmap_page() API.
>
> Best regards
> --
> Marek Szyprowski, PhD
> Samsung R&D Institute Poland
>
>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists