[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20191115165331.GA2518@localhost.localdomain>
Date: Fri, 15 Nov 2019 18:53:31 +0200
From: Lorenzo Bianconi <lorenzo@...nel.org>
To: Jonathan Lemon <jonathan.lemon@...il.com>
Cc: Ilias Apalodimas <ilias.apalodimas@...aro.org>,
Lorenzo Bianconi <lorenzo.bianconi@...hat.com>,
Jesper Dangaard Brouer <brouer@...hat.com>,
netdev@...r.kernel.org, davem@...emloft.net,
thomas.petazzoni@...tlin.com, matteo.croce@...hat.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next 2/3] net: page_pool: add the possibility to sync
DMA memory for non-coherent devices
[...]
> > > >
> > > > Okay, then i guess the flag is a better fit for this.
> > > > The only difference would be that the sync semantics will be
> > > > done on 'per
> > > > packet' basis, instead of 'per pool', but that should be fine
> > > > for our cases.
> > >
> > > Ack, fine for me.
> > > Do you think when checking for PP_FLAG_DMA_SYNC_DEV we should even
> > > verify
> > > PP_FLAG_DMA_MAP? Something like:
> > >
> > > if ((pool->p.flags & (PP_FLAG_DMA_MAP | PP_FLAG_DMA_SYNC_DEV)) ==
> > > (PP_FLAG_DMA_MAP | PP_FLAG_DMA_SYNC_DEV))
> > > page_pool_dma_sync_for_device();
> > >
> > > Regards,
> > > Lorenzo
> >
> > I think it's better to do the check once on the pool registration and
> > maybe
> > refuse to allocate the pool? Syncing without mapping doesn't really make
> > sense
>
> +1.
ack, will post v3 soon.
Regards,
Lorenzo
> --
> Jonathan
Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (229 bytes)
Powered by blists - more mailing lists