Re: [PATCH v2 3/3] arch/*/: remove CONFIG_VIRT_TO_BUS

[Michael Schmitz]

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
Hii Geert

Am 28.06.2022 um 09:12 schrieb Michael Schmitz:
> Hi Geert,
>
> On 27/06/22 20:26, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
> > Hi Michael,
> >
> > On Sat, Jun 18, 2022 at 3:06 AM Michael Schmitz <schmitzmic@xxxxxxxxx>
> > wrote:
> > > Am 18.06.2022 um 00:57 schrieb Arnd Bergmann:
> > > > From: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@xxxxxxxx>
> > > >
> > > > All architecture-independent users of virt_to_bus() and bus_to_virt()
> > > > have been fixed to use the dma mapping interfaces or have been
> > > > removed now.  This means the definitions on most architectures, and the
> > > > CONFIG_VIRT_TO_BUS symbol are now obsolete and can be removed.
> > > >
> > > > The only exceptions to this are a few network and scsi drivers for m68k
> > > > Amiga and VME machines and ppc32 Macintosh. These drivers work
> > > > correctly
> > > > with the old interfaces and are probably not worth changing.
> > > The Amiga SCSI drivers are all old WD33C93 ones, and replacing
> > > virt_to_bus by virt_to_phys in the dma_setup() function there would
> > > cause no functional change at all.
> > FTR, the sgiwd93 driver use dma_map_single().
>
> Thanks! From what I see, it doesn't have to deal with bounce buffers
> though?

Leaving the bounce buffer handling in place, and taking a few other 
liberties - this is what converting the easiest case (a3000 SCSI) might 
look like. Any obvious mistakes? The mvme147 driver would be very 
similar to handle (after conversion to a platform device).

The driver allocates bounce buffers using kmalloc if it hits an 
unaligned data buffer - can such buffers still even happen these days? 
If I understand dma_map_single() correctly, the resulting dma handle 
would be equally misaligned?

To allocate a bounce buffer, would it be OK to use dma_alloc_coherent() 
even though AFAIU memory used for DMA buffers generally isn't consistent 
on m68k?

Thinking ahead to the other two Amiga drivers - I wonder whether 
allocating a static bounce buffer or a DMA pool at driver init is likely 
to succeed if the kernel runs from the low 16 MB RAM chunk? It certainly 
won't succeed if the kernel runs from a higher memory address, so the 
present bounce buffer logic around amiga_chip_alloc() might still need 
to be used here.

Leaves the question whether converting the gvp11 and a2091 drivers is 
actually worth it, if bounce buffers still have to be handled explicitly.

Untested (except for compile testing), un-checkpatched, don't try this 
on any disk with valuable data ...

Cheers,

	Michael