Messages in this thread | | | Date | Tue, 21 Aug 2012 13:59:48 +0100 | From | Catalin Marinas <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH v2 14/31] arm64: DMA mapping API |
| |
On Wed, Aug 15, 2012 at 05:16:00PM +0100, Arnd Bergmann wrote: > On Tuesday 14 August 2012, Catalin Marinas wrote: > > +static struct dma_map_ops arm64_swiotlb_dma_ops = { > > + .alloc = arm64_swiotlb_alloc_coherent, > > + .free = arm64_swiotlb_free_coherent, > > + .map_page = arm64_swiotlb_map_page, > > + .unmap_page = arm64_swiotlb_unmap_page, > > + .map_sg = arm64_swiotlb_map_sg_attrs, > > + .unmap_sg = arm64_swiotlb_unmap_sg_attrs, > > + .sync_single_for_cpu = arm64_swiotlb_sync_single_for_cpu, > > + .sync_single_for_device = arm64_swiotlb_sync_single_for_device, > > + .sync_sg_for_cpu = arm64_swiotlb_sync_sg_for_cpu, > > + .sync_sg_for_device = arm64_swiotlb_sync_sg_for_device, > > + .dma_supported = swiotlb_dma_supported, > > + .mapping_error = swiotlb_dma_mapping_error, > > +}; > > + > > +void __init swiotlb_init_with_default_size(size_t default_size, int verbose); > > + > > +void __init arm64_swiotlb_init(size_t max_size) > > +{ > > + dma_ops = &arm64_swiotlb_dma_ops; > > + swiotlb_init_with_default_size(min((size_t)SZ_64M, max_size), 1); > > +} > > Why is swiotlb the default? I would expect that most devices can in fact > use the entire 64 bit address space, so you can use a simple linear > implementation for those.
That was my worry, devices not capable of accessing the full 64-bit address space. We can hope that those SoCs would have an IOMMU but I can't tell for sure at this stage.
The default implementation could be simpler. I can even drop it altogether from the initial patchset given that no SoC makes use of it yet.
-- Catalin
| |