On Mon, Sep 21, 2020 at 04:08:01PM +0100, Robin Murphy wrote: > Checking for a nonzero dma_pfn_offset was a quick shortcut to validate > whether the DMA == phys assumption could hold at all. Checking for a > non-NULL dma_range_map is not quite equivalent, since a map may be > present to describe a limited DMA window even without an offset, and > thus this check can now yield false positives. > > However, it only ever served to short-circuit going all the way through > to __arm_lpae_alloc_pages(), failing the canonical test there, and > having a bit more to clean up. As such, we can simply remove it without > loss of correctness. > > Reported-by: Naresh Kamboju <naresh.kamb...@linaro.org> > Signed-off-by: Robin Murphy <robin.mur...@arm.com>
Thanks, applied to the dma-mapping for-next tree. _______________________________________________ iommu mailing list iommu@lists.linux-foundation.org https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/iommu