[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <aO1MfsuWeteOsBve@kbusch-mbp>
Date: Mon, 13 Oct 2025 13:01:18 -0600
From: Keith Busch <kbusch@...nel.org>
To: Leon Romanovsky <leon@...nel.org>
Cc: Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>, Jens Axboe <axboe@...nel.dk>,
Leon Romanovsky <leonro@...dia.com>,
Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@...dia.com>, linux-block@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-nvme@...ts.infradead.org,
Sagi Grimberg <sagi@...mberg.me>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/4] block-dma: properly take MMIO path
On Mon, Oct 13, 2025 at 06:34:11PM +0300, Leon Romanovsky wrote:
> static bool blk_dma_map_direct(struct request *req, struct device *dma_dev,
> struct blk_dma_iter *iter, struct phys_vec *vec)
> {
> + unsigned int attrs = 0;
> +
> + if (req->cmd_flags & REQ_MMIO)
> + attrs |= DMA_ATTR_MMIO;
Since data and integrity paylods use these same functions and may point
to different kinds of memory, I think you'd have to pass the 'attrs'
from the caller since it knows which flags to check for MMIO dma.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists