On Wed, Feb 11, 2015 at 09:28:37AM +0100, Marek Szyprowski wrote:
On 2015-01-27 09:25, Sumit Semwal wrote:Which is a damn good reason to NAK it - by that admission, it's a half-baked
Add some helpers to share the constraints of devices while attachingThe code looks okay, although it will probably will work well only with
to the dmabuf buffer.
At each attach, the constraints are calculated based on the following:
- max_segment_size, max_segment_count, segment_boundary_mask from
In case the attaching device's constraints don't match up, attach() fails.
At detach, the constraints are recalculated based on the remaining
Two helpers are added:
- dma_buf_get_constraints - which gives the current constraints as calculated
during each attach on the buffer till the time,
- dma_buf_recalc_constraints - which recalculates the constraints for all
currently attached devices for the 'paranoid' ones amongst us.
The idea of this patch is largely taken from Rob Clark's RFC at
https://lkml.org/lkml/2012/7/19/285, and the comments received on it.
Cc: Rob Clark <robdclark@xxxxxxxxx>
Signed-off-by: Sumit Semwal <sumit.semwal@xxxxxxxxxx>
typical cases like 'contiguous memory needed' or 'no constraints at all'
If all we want to know is whether the importer can accept only contiguous
memory or not, make a flag to do that, and allow the exporter to test this
flag. Don't over-engineer this to make it _seem_ like it can do something
that it actually totally fails with.
As I've already pointed out, there's a major problem if you have already
had a less restrictive attachment which has an active mapping, and a new
more restrictive attachment comes along later.
It seems from Rob's descriptions that we also need another flag in the
importer to indicate whether it wants to have a valid struct page in the
scatter list, or whether it (correctly) uses the DMA accessors on the
scatter list - so that exporters can reject importers which are buggy.