[PATCH v2 1/1] drm: msm: Replace dma_map_sg with dma_sync_sg*

[Vivek Gautam]

On Wed, Nov 28, 2018 at 6:09 PM Rob Clark <robdclark at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On Wed, Nov 28, 2018 at 2:39 AM Christoph Hellwig <hch at infradead.org> wrote:
> >
> > > +             /*
> > > +              * dma_sync_sg_*() flush the physical pages, so point
> > > +              * sg->dma_address to the physical ones for the right behavior.
> > > +              */
> > > +             for_each_sg(msm_obj->sgt->sgl, s, msm_obj->sgt->nents, i)
> > > +                     sg_dma_address(s) = sg_phys(s);
> > > +
> >
> > I'm sorry, but this is completely bogus and not acceptable.
> >
> > The only place that is allowed to initialize sg_dma_address is
> > dma_map_sg.  If the default dma ops don't work for your setup we have
> > major a problem and need to fix the dma api / iommu integration instead
> > of hacking around it.
>
> I agree that the dma/iommu integration is very problematic for drm (in
> particular, gpu drivers that use the iommu as an gpu mmu)..  Really we
> need a way that a driver can opt-out of this, and access the cpu cache
> APIs directly, skipping the dma API entirely.  But as it is, we've had
> to hack around the dma API.  I'm not really sure this hack is any
> worse than abusing dma_(un)map_sg() for doing cache operations.
>
> I probably should have paid more attention and nak'd the dma/iommu
> integration before it landed.  But given that now we are stuck in this
> situation, while I'm certainly interested if anyone has some ideas
> about how to let drivers opt out of the dma/iommu integration and
> bypass the dma API layer, I'm ok with replacing a hack with a less-bad
> hack.

May I take it as a positive nod to respin the next version?

Regards
Vivek

>
> BR,
> -R



-- 
QUALCOMM INDIA, on behalf of Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member
of Code Aurora Forum, hosted by The Linux Foundation