[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] Re: [PATCH v4 09/16] dma-mapping: handle MMIO flow in dma_map|unmap_page
On Thu, Aug 28, 2025 at 12:17:30PM -0300, Jason Gunthorpe wrote: > On Tue, Aug 19, 2025 at 08:36:53PM +0300, Leon Romanovsky wrote: > > From: Leon Romanovsky <leonro@xxxxxxxxxx> > > > > Extend base DMA page API to handle MMIO flow and follow > > existing dma_map_resource() implementation to rely on dma_map_direct() > > only to take DMA direct path. > > I would reword this a little bit too > > dma-mapping: implement DMA_ATTR_MMIO for dma_(un)map_page_attrs() > > Make dma_map_page_attrs() and dma_map_page_attrs() respect > DMA_ATTR_MMIO. > > DMA_ATR_MMIO makes the functions behave the same as dma_(un)map_resource(): > - No swiotlb is possible > - Legacy dma_ops arches use ops->map_resource() > - No kmsan > - No arch_dma_map_phys_direct() > > The prior patches have made the internl funtions called here support > DMA_ATTR_MMIO. > > This is also preparation for turning dma_map_resource() into an inline > calling dma_map_phys(DMA_ATTR_MMIO) to consolidate the flows. > > > @@ -166,14 +167,25 @@ dma_addr_t dma_map_page_attrs(struct device *dev, > > struct page *page, > > return DMA_MAPPING_ERROR; > > > > if (dma_map_direct(dev, ops) || > > - arch_dma_map_phys_direct(dev, phys + size)) > > + (!is_mmio && arch_dma_map_phys_direct(dev, phys + size))) > > addr = dma_direct_map_phys(dev, phys, size, dir, attrs); > > PPC is the only user of arch_dma_map_phys_direct() and it looks like > it should be called on MMIO memory. Seems like another inconsistency > with map_resource. I'd leave it like the above though for this series. > > > else if (use_dma_iommu(dev)) > > addr = iommu_dma_map_phys(dev, phys, size, dir, attrs); > > - else > > + else if (is_mmio) { > > + if (!ops->map_resource) > > + return DMA_MAPPING_ERROR; > > Probably written like: > > if (ops->map_resource) > addr = ops->map_resource(dev, phys, size, dir, attrs); > else > addr = DMA_MAPPING_ERROR; I'm big fan of "if (!ops->map_resource)" coding style and prefer to keep it. > > As I think some of the design here is to run the trace even on the > failure path? Yes, this is how it worked before. > > Otherwise looks OK > > Reviewed-by: Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@xxxxxxxxxx> > > Jason
|
![]() |
Lists.xenproject.org is hosted with RackSpace, monitoring our |