Re: [PATCH 1/3] x86: remove the NULL device hack in dma-mapping.h
From: Joerg Roedel
Date: Thu Sep 04 2008 - 06:01:49 EST
On Thu, Sep 04, 2008 at 01:11:46PM +0900, FUJITA Tomonori wrote:
> On Wed, 3 Sep 2008 22:01:14 +0200
> Joerg Roedel <joro@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> > On Thu, Sep 04, 2008 at 03:04:23AM +0900, FUJITA Tomonori wrote:
> > > dma_alloc_coherent in dma-mapping.h has a hack to use
> > > x86_dma_fallback_dev if a pointer to a device is NULL. Some of IOMMUs
> > > don't need such hack. The hack also makes it difficult for IOMMUs to
> > > make a proper decision because the hack hides the information.
> >
> > I don't think its the right way to work around shortcomings of the
> > generic code in the architecture specific implementations. Especially
> > when the generic code can be easily fixed like in this case.
>
> Well, the generic code should not have such work around.
I don't see that as a workaround. It is the best what we can do to
handle device dma_masks with the current Linux page allocator (if we
don't have hardware dma translation).
> As I wrote in another mail, you try to bring back the tricks used in
> arch/x86/kernel/pci-dma.c to lib/swiotlb.c. I try to bring back them
> to arch/x86/kernel/pci-swiotlb.c.
As I said, I don't see that as a 'hack'. It is also what the fixme
comment in the swiotlb alloc_coherent function stated, that this
function has to handle the DMA mask of the device.
> > > +static void *x86_swiotlb_alloc_coherent(struct device *dev, size_t size,
> > > + dma_addr_t *dma_handle, gfp_t gfp)
> > > +{
> > > + if (!dev) {
> > > + dev = &x86_dma_fallback_dev;
> > > + gfp |= GFP_DMA;
> > > + }
> >
> > This really should be checked in the generic x86 dma_alloc_coherent
> > function.
>
> I don't think so. Any motherboards with the recent IOMMUs support ISA?
Not that I am aware of. But as we both know there are people who do
corner case tests with the dma-api functions like passing their own
created devices or even NULL to it an look what happens :-)
We have to handle this case in _every_ IOMMU implemention. So the
generic function is the right place for this check, imho.
Joerg
--
| AMD Saxony Limited Liability Company & Co. KG
Operating | Wilschdorfer Landstr. 101, 01109 Dresden, Germany
System | Register Court Dresden: HRA 4896
Research | General Partner authorized to represent:
Center | AMD Saxony LLC (Wilmington, Delaware, US)
| General Manager of AMD Saxony LLC: Dr. Hans-R. Deppe, Thomas McCoy
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/