Messages in this thread | | | Date | Mon, 7 Feb 2022 15:55:32 +0000 | Subject | Re: [PATCH v2 1/1] iommu/dma: Use DMA ops setter instead of direct assignment | From | Robin Murphy <> |
| |
On 2022-02-07 14:13, Andy Shevchenko wrote: > Use DMA ops setter instead of direct assignment. Even we know that > this module doesn't perform access to the dma_ops member of struct device, > it's better to use setter to avoid potential problems in the future.
What potential problems are you imagining? This whole file is a DMA ops implementation, not driver code (and definitely not a module); if anyone removes the "select DMA_OPS" from CONFIG_IOMMU_DMA they deserve whatever breakage they get.
I concur that there's no major harm in using the helper here, but I also see no point in pretending that there's any value to abstracting the operation in this particular context.
Thanks, Robin.
> Signed-off-by: Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com> > --- > v2: rebased on top of the latest codebase > drivers/iommu/dma-iommu.c | 2 +- > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) > > diff --git a/drivers/iommu/dma-iommu.c b/drivers/iommu/dma-iommu.c > index d85d54f2b549..b585a3fdbc56 100644 > --- a/drivers/iommu/dma-iommu.c > +++ b/drivers/iommu/dma-iommu.c > @@ -1482,7 +1482,7 @@ void iommu_setup_dma_ops(struct device *dev, u64 dma_base, u64 dma_limit) > if (iommu_is_dma_domain(domain)) { > if (iommu_dma_init_domain(domain, dma_base, dma_limit, dev)) > goto out_err; > - dev->dma_ops = &iommu_dma_ops; > + set_dma_ops(dev, &iommu_dma_ops); > } > > return;
| |