Re: [RFC PATCH v2 19/27] PCI: dwc: ep: Cache MSI outbound iATU mapping

[Koichiro Den]

On Wed, Dec 03, 2025 at 11:36:31PM +0900, Koichiro Den wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 03, 2025 at 11:39:21AM +0100, Niklas Cassel wrote:
> > On Wed, Dec 03, 2025 at 05:40:45PM +0900, Koichiro Den wrote:
> > > > 
> > > > If we want to improve the dw-edma driver, so that an EPF driver can have
> > > > multiple outstanding transfers, I think the best way forward would be to create
> > > > a new _prep_slave_memcpy() or similar, that does take a direction, and thus
> > > > does not require dmaengine_slave_config() to be called before every
> > > > _prep_slave_memcpy() call.
> > > 
> > > Would dmaengine_prep_slave_single_config(), which Frank tolds us in this
> > > thread, be sufficient?
> > 
> > I think that Frank is suggesting a new dmaengine API,
> > dmaengine_prep_slave_single_config(), which is like
> > dmaengine_prep_slave_single(), but also takes a struct dma_slave_config *
> > as a parameter.
> > 
> > 
> > I really like the idea.
> > I think it would allow us to remove the mutex in nvmet_pci_epf_dma_transfer():
> > https://github.com/torvalds/linux/blob/v6.18/drivers/nvme/target/pci-epf.c#L389-L429
> 
> Thank you for the clarification. I was wondering whether there were any
> particular reasons for covering such a broad window (i.e. from
> dmaengine_prep_slave_sg() to the end of dma_sync_wait()) with the mutex in
> the nvme case (but it seems there are none, right?).
> 
> > 
> > Frank you wrote: "Thanks, we also consider ..."
> > Does that mean that you have any plans to work on this?
> > I would definitely be interested.
> 
> No, I only learned about the idea in this thread. I also think it is a good
> idea, but I would be interested to know why it has not been upstreamed so
> far, I mean, whether there were any technical hurdles. Frank, any input
> would be greatly appreciated.

Oh sorry this part was to Frank. Please disregard my comment here.

Koichiro

> 
> Thank you,
> Koichiro
> 
> > 
> > 
> > Kind regards,
> > Niklas