[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <687ac9bb-c7ca-fc71-9e61-d9247198224a@huawei.com>
Date: Fri, 8 Dec 2023 19:28:48 +0800
From: Yunsheng Lin <linyunsheng@...wei.com>
To: Alexander Lobakin <aleksander.lobakin@...el.com>, "David S. Miller"
<davem@...emloft.net>, Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>, Jakub Kicinski
<kuba@...nel.org>, Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>
CC: Maciej Fijalkowski <maciej.fijalkowski@...el.com>, Michal Kubiak
<michal.kubiak@...el.com>, Larysa Zaremba <larysa.zaremba@...el.com>,
Alexander Duyck <alexanderduyck@...com>, David Christensen
<drc@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>, Jesper Dangaard Brouer <hawk@...nel.org>, Ilias
Apalodimas <ilias.apalodimas@...aro.org>, Paul Menzel
<pmenzel@...gen.mpg.de>, <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
<intel-wired-lan@...ts.osuosl.org>, <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next v6 08/12] libie: add Rx buffer management (via
Page Pool)
On 2023/12/8 17:28, Yunsheng Lin wrote:
>> +
>> + page_pool_dma_sync_for_cpu(page->pp, page, buf->offset, len);
>
> Is there a reason why page_pool_dma_sync_for_cpu() is still used when
> page_pool_create() is called with PP_FLAG_DMA_SYNC_DEV flag? Isn't syncing
> already handled in page_pool core when when PP_FLAG_DMA_SYNC_DEV flag is
> set?
Ah, it is a sync_for_cpu.
Ignore this one.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists