Re: [PATCH 2/2] arm64: avoid increasing DMA masks above what hardware supports

2017-01-13 Thread kbuild test robot 
Hi Nikita,

[auto build test ERROR on linus/master]
[also build test ERROR on v4.10-rc3 next-20170112]
[cannot apply to arm64/for-next/core]
[if your patch is applied to the wrong git tree, please drop us a note to help 
improve the system]

url:
https://github.com/0day-ci/linux/commits/Nikita-Yushchenko/dma-mapping-let-arch-know-origin-of-dma-range-passed-to-arch_setup_dma_ops/20170113-152733
config: arm64-defconfig (attached as .config)
compiler: aarch64-linux-gnu-gcc (Debian 6.1.1-9) 6.1.1 20160705
reproduce:
wget 
https://git.kernel.org/cgit/linux/kernel/git/wfg/lkp-tests.git/plain/sbin/make.cross
 -O ~/bin/make.cross
chmod +x ~/bin/make.cross
# save the attached .config to linux build tree
make.cross ARCH=arm64 

All errors (new ones prefixed by >>):

   arch/arm64/mm/dma-mapping.c: In function 'dma_set_mask':
>> arch/arm64/mm/dma-mapping.c:210:6: error: 'mask' undeclared (first use in 
>> this function)
 if (mask > dev->archdata.parent_dma_mask)
 ^~~~
   arch/arm64/mm/dma-mapping.c:210:6: note: each undeclared identifier is 
reported only once for each function it appears in

vim +/mask +210 arch/arm64/mm/dma-mapping.c

   204  }
   205  
   206  int dma_set_mask(struct device *dev, u64 dma_mask)
   207  {
   208  const struct dma_map_ops *ops = get_dma_ops(dev);
   209  
 > 210  if (mask > dev->archdata.parent_dma_mask)
   211  mask = dev->archdata.parent_dma_mask;
   212  
   213  if (ops->set_dma_mask)

---
0-DAY kernel test infrastructureOpen Source Technology Center
https://lists.01.org/pipermail/kbuild-all   Intel Corporation


.config.gz
Description: application/gzip

Re: [PATCH 2/2] arm64: avoid increasing DMA masks above what hardware supports

2017-01-11 Thread Nikita Yushchenko 
>> @@ -959,6 +990,15 @@ void arch_setup_dma_ops(struct device *dev, u64 
>> dma_base, u64 size,
>> if (!dev->archdata.dma_ops)
>> dev->archdata.dma_ops = &swiotlb_dma_ops;
>>  
>> +   /*
>> +* Whatever the parent bus can set. A device must not set
>> +* a DMA mask larger than this.
>> +*/
>> +   if (enforce_range)
>> +   dev->archdata.parent_dma_mask = size - 1;
>> +   else
>> +   dev->archdata.parent_dma_mask = DMA_BIT_MASK(64);
>> +
>> dev->archdata.dma_coherent = coherent;
>> __iommu_setup_dma_ops(dev, dma_base, size, iommu);
>>
> 
> Could we just pass the mask instead of the size here?

We don't want to change API now.

Nikita

Re: [PATCH 2/2] arm64: avoid increasing DMA masks above what hardware supports

2017-01-11 Thread Arnd Bergmann 
On Wednesday, January 11, 2017 9:31:52 PM CET Nikita Yushchenko wrote:
> @@ -959,6 +990,15 @@ void arch_setup_dma_ops(struct device *dev, u64 
> dma_base, u64 size,
> if (!dev->archdata.dma_ops)
> dev->archdata.dma_ops = &swiotlb_dma_ops;
>  
> +   /*
> +* Whatever the parent bus can set. A device must not set
> +* a DMA mask larger than this.
> +*/
> +   if (enforce_range)
> +   dev->archdata.parent_dma_mask = size - 1;
> +   else
> +   dev->archdata.parent_dma_mask = DMA_BIT_MASK(64);
> +
> dev->archdata.dma_coherent = coherent;
> __iommu_setup_dma_ops(dev, dma_base, size, iommu);
> 

Could we just pass the mask instead of the size here?

Arnd