On Thu, Sep 18, 2014 at 12:17:33PM +0100, Laurent Pinchart wrote: > Hi Will,
Hello again, > On Friday 12 September 2014 17:34:53 Will Deacon wrote: > > @@ -195,7 +197,19 @@ static void of_dma_configure(struct platform_device > > *pdev) dev_dbg(dev, "device is%sdma coherent\n", > > coherent ? " " : " not "); > > > > - arch_setup_dma_ops(dev, coherent); > > + iommu = of_iommu_configure(dev); > > + dev_dbg(dev, "device is%sbehind an iommu\n", > > + iommu ? " " : " not "); > > + > > + arch_setup_dma_ops(dev, dma_addr, size, iommu, coherent); > > + > > + if (iommu) > > + kref_put(&iommu->kref, of_iommu_deconfigure); > > What's the expected life cycle of the iommu_dma_mapping structure ? It gets > created by of_iommu_configure() and the initial reference gets dropped here. > I > suppose you expect arch code to need to keep a reference to the structure, > but > your implementation in patch 7/7 doesn't. As far as I can see, you don't even > use the contents of the structure in the ARM arch_setup_dma_ops() > implementation. Do you expect that to change later, or other architectures to > need it ? Indeed, I've not done anything to the ARM dma-mapping ops other than plug-in the existing code, which doesn't use these new features. I think Marek was going to look at that. > By the way, now that I think about it, I find struct iommu_dma_mapping and > struct dma_iommu_mapping very confusing. Yup; I'd like to see some generic code that uses the per-IOMMU-instance domain and allocator which is passed to arch_setup_dma_ops. Then we could simply move arch/arm/ (and arm64) over to that, which would get rid of dma_iommu_mapping entirely. Will _______________________________________________ iommu mailing list [email protected] https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/iommu
