Re: [PATCH v2 10/11] xen/arm: introduce phys/dma translations in xen_dma_sync_for_*

[Stefano Stabellini <sstabellini@xxxxxxxxxx>]

On Mon, 8 Jun 2020, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 08, 2020 at 10:38:02PM -0700, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> > On Mon, Jun 08, 2020 at 05:38:28PM -0700, Stefano Stabellini wrote:
> > > Yeah, the pfn_valid check is a bit weird by definition because we are
> > > using it to understand whether the address belong to us or to another
> > > VM. To do the pfn_valid check we need to translate the dma address into
> > > something the CPU understands, hence, the dma_to_phys call.
> > > 
> > > Why can't we use the already-provided paddr? Because paddr has been
> > > translated twice:
> > > 1) from dma to maybe-foreign phys address (could be ours, or another VM)
> > > 2) from maybe-foreign address to local (using our local mapping of the 
> > > foreign page)
> > > 
> > > In fact, it would be clearer if we had all three addresses as parameters
> > > of xen_dma_sync_for_cpu: the dma address, the maybe-foreign physical
> > > address (we tend to call it xenbus address, baddr), the local physical
> > > address. Something like:
> > 
> > I think instead we should move the arch_sync_dma_for_{device,cpu}
> > calls from xen_dma_sync_for_{device,cpu} into the callers, as they
> > are provided by the generic dma-noncoherent.h and optimized out for
> > coherent architectures like x86.  Then the swiotlb-xen.c code only
> > need to call dma_cache_maint as the interface (which would have to
> > grow a better name), which should then only need a single kind of
> > address.
> 
> ... actually I'd keep the xen_dma_sync_for_{device,cpu} names for the
> low-level interface, just move the arch_sync_dma_for_{device,cpu}
> calls up.

I can do that.