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.shevche...@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;
_______________________________________________
iommu mailing list
iommu@lists.linux-foundation.org
https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/iommu
