Re: [V2 PATCH 2/5] arm64 : Introduce support for ACPI _CCA object

[Robin Murphy]

Hi Suravee,

On 05/05/15 16:12, Suravee Suthikulpanit wrote:
>  From http://www.uefi.org/sites/default/files/resources/ACPI_6.0.pdf,
> section 6.2.17 _CCA states that ARM platforms require ACPI _CCA
> object to be specified for DMA-cabpable devices. This patch introduces
> ACPI_MUST_HAVE_CCA in arm64 Kconfig to specify such requirement.
>
> In this case of missing _CCA, arm64 would assign dummy_dma_ops
> to disable DMA capability of the device.
>
> Signed-off-by: Mark Salter <msalter@xxxxxxxxxx>
> Signed-off-by: Suravee Suthikulpanit <Suravee.Suthikulpanit@xxxxxxx>
> ---

[...]
> +static void __dummy_sync_single_for_cpu(struct device *dev,
> +					dma_addr_t dev_addr, size_t size,
> +					enum dma_data_direction dir)
> +{
> +}
> +
> +static void __dummy_sync_single_for_device(struct device *dev,
> +					   dma_addr_t dev_addr, size_t size,
> +					   enum dma_data_direction dir)
> +{
> +}

Minor point, but I don't see the need to have multiple dummy functions 
with identical signatures - just have a generic dummy_sync_single and 
assign it to both ops.

> +static void __dummy_sync_sg_for_cpu(struct device *dev,
> +				    struct scatterlist *sgl, int nelems,
> +				    enum dma_data_direction dir)
> +{
> +}
> +
> +static void __dummy_sync_sg_for_device(struct device *dev,
> +				       struct scatterlist *sgl, int nelems,
> +				       enum dma_data_direction dir)
> +{
> +}

Ditto here with dummy_sync_sg.

I wonder if there's any argument for putting the dummy DMA ops somewhere 
common, like drivers/base/dma-mapping.c?

Robin.

--
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/