[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20220222155904.GA13323@lst.de>
Date: Tue, 22 Feb 2022 16:59:04 +0100
From: Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>
To: Baoquan He <bhe@...hat.com>
Cc: Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-mm@...ck.org, akpm@...ux-foundation.org, cl@...ux.com,
42.hyeyoo@...il.com, penberg@...nel.org, rientjes@...gle.com,
iamjoonsoo.kim@....com, vbabka@...e.cz, David.Laight@...lab.com,
david@...hat.com, herbert@...dor.apana.org.au, davem@...emloft.net,
linux-crypto@...r.kernel.org, steffen.klassert@...unet.com,
netdev@...r.kernel.org, hca@...ux.ibm.com, gor@...ux.ibm.com,
agordeev@...ux.ibm.com, borntraeger@...ux.ibm.com,
svens@...ux.ibm.com, linux-s390@...r.kernel.org, michael@...le.cc,
linux-i2c@...r.kernel.org, wsa@...nel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] dma-mapping: check dma_mask for streaming mapping
allocs
On Tue, Feb 22, 2022 at 09:41:43PM +0800, Baoquan He wrote:
> For newly added streaming mapping APIs, the internal core function
> __dma_alloc_pages() should check dev->dma_mask, but not
> ev->coherent_dma_mask which is for coherent mapping.
No, this is wrong. dev->coherent_dma_mask is and should be used here.
>
>
> Meanwhile, just filter out gfp flags if they are any of
> __GFP_DMA, __GFP_DMA32 and __GFP_HIGHMEM, but not fail it. This change
> makes it consistent with coherent mapping allocs.
This is wrong as well. We want to eventually fail dma_alloc_coherent
for these, too. It just needs more work.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists