lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2020]   [Jun]   [9]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH v2 10/11] xen/arm: introduce phys/dma translations in xen_dma_sync_for_*
On Mon, Jun 08, 2020 at 10:38:02PM -0700, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 08, 2020 at 05:38:28PM -0700, Stefano Stabellini wrote:
> > Yeah, the pfn_valid check is a bit weird by definition because we are
> > using it to understand whether the address belong to us or to another
> > VM. To do the pfn_valid check we need to translate the dma address into
> > something the CPU understands, hence, the dma_to_phys call.
> >
> > Why can't we use the already-provided paddr? Because paddr has been
> > translated twice:
> > 1) from dma to maybe-foreign phys address (could be ours, or another VM)
> > 2) from maybe-foreign address to local (using our local mapping of the foreign page)
> >
> > In fact, it would be clearer if we had all three addresses as parameters
> > of xen_dma_sync_for_cpu: the dma address, the maybe-foreign physical
> > address (we tend to call it xenbus address, baddr), the local physical
> > address. Something like:
>
> I think instead we should move the arch_sync_dma_for_{device,cpu}
> calls from xen_dma_sync_for_{device,cpu} into the callers, as they
> are provided by the generic dma-noncoherent.h and optimized out for
> coherent architectures like x86. Then the swiotlb-xen.c code only
> need to call dma_cache_maint as the interface (which would have to
> grow a better name), which should then only need a single kind of
> address.

... actually I'd keep the xen_dma_sync_for_{device,cpu} names for the
low-level interface, just move the arch_sync_dma_for_{device,cpu}
calls up.

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2020-06-09 07:41    [W:0.056 / U:1.440 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site