[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20250901222302.GA186519@nvidia.com>
Date: Mon, 1 Sep 2025 19:23:02 -0300
From: Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@...dia.com>
To: Marek Szyprowski <m.szyprowski@...sung.com>
Cc: Leon Romanovsky <leon@...nel.org>,
Abdiel Janulgue <abdiel.janulgue@...il.com>,
Alexander Potapenko <glider@...gle.com>,
Alex Gaynor <alex.gaynor@...il.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>, Danilo Krummrich <dakr@...nel.org>,
iommu@...ts.linux.dev, Jason Wang <jasowang@...hat.com>,
Jens Axboe <axboe@...nel.dk>, Joerg Roedel <joro@...tes.org>,
Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net>, Juergen Gross <jgross@...e.com>,
kasan-dev@...glegroups.com, Keith Busch <kbusch@...nel.org>,
linux-block@...r.kernel.org, linux-doc@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-mm@...ck.org,
linux-nvme@...ts.infradead.org, linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org,
linux-trace-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Madhavan Srinivasan <maddy@...ux.ibm.com>,
Masami Hiramatsu <mhiramat@...nel.org>,
Michael Ellerman <mpe@...erman.id.au>,
"Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@...hat.com>,
Miguel Ojeda <ojeda@...nel.org>,
Robin Murphy <robin.murphy@....com>, rust-for-linux@...r.kernel.org,
Sagi Grimberg <sagi@...mberg.me>,
Stefano Stabellini <sstabellini@...nel.org>,
Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
virtualization@...ts.linux.dev, Will Deacon <will@...nel.org>,
xen-devel@...ts.xenproject.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 00/16] dma-mapping: migrate to physical address-based
API
On Mon, Sep 01, 2025 at 11:47:59PM +0200, Marek Szyprowski wrote:
> I would like to give those patches a try in linux-next, but in meantime
> I tested it on my test farm and found a regression in dma_map_resource()
> handling. Namely the dma_map_resource() is no longer possible with size
> not aligned to kmalloc()'ed buffer, as dma_direct_map_phys() calls
> dma_kmalloc_needs_bounce(),
Hmm, it's this bit:
capable = dma_capable(dev, dma_addr, size, !(attrs & DMA_ATTR_MMIO));
if (unlikely(!capable) || dma_kmalloc_needs_bounce(dev, size, dir)) {
if (is_swiotlb_active(dev) && !(attrs & DMA_ATTR_MMIO))
return swiotlb_map(dev, phys, size, dir, attrs);
goto err_overflow;
}
We shouldn't be checking dma_kmalloc_needs_bounce() on mmio as there
is no cache flushing so the "dma safe alignment" for non-coherent DMA
does not apply.
Like you say looks good to me, and more of the surrouding code can be
pulled in too, no sense in repeating the boolean logic:
if (attrs & DMA_ATTR_MMIO) {
dma_addr = phys;
if (unlikely(!dma_capable(dev, dma_addr, size, false)))
goto err_overflow;
} else {
dma_addr = phys_to_dma(dev, phys);
if (unlikely(!dma_capable(dev, dma_addr, size, true)) ||
dma_kmalloc_needs_bounce(dev, size, dir)) {
if (is_swiotlb_active(dev))
return swiotlb_map(dev, phys, size, dir, attrs);
goto err_overflow;
}
if (!dev_is_dma_coherent(dev) &&
!(attrs & DMA_ATTR_SKIP_CPU_SYNC))
arch_sync_dma_for_device(phys, size, dir);
}
Jason
Powered by blists - more mailing lists