Mostafa Saleh <[email protected]> writes:
...
>> struct page *dma_alloc_from_pool(struct device *dev, size_t size,
>> - void **cpu_addr, gfp_t gfp,
>> + void **cpu_addr, gfp_t gfp, unsigned long attrs,
>> bool (*phys_addr_ok)(struct device *, phys_addr_t, size_t))
>> {
>> - struct gen_pool *pool = NULL;
>> + struct dma_gen_pool *dma_pool = NULL;
>> struct page *page;
>> bool pool_found = false;
>>
>> - while ((pool = dma_guess_pool(pool, gfp))) {
>> + while ((dma_pool = dma_guess_pool(dma_pool, gfp))) {
>> +
>> + if (dma_pool->unencrypted != !!(attrs & DMA_ATTR_CC_SHARED))
>> + continue;
>> +
>
> nit: If we fail to find a matching pool, a slightly misleading message
> is printed as pool_found = false
>
The message printed is
WARN(1, "Failed to get suitable pool for %s\n", dev_name(dev));
That is correct, isn’t it? The kernel failed to find a pool with the
correct encryption attribute. For example, the request was for an
encrypted allocation from the pool, but no encrypted pool was available.
>
>> pool_found = true;
>> - page = __dma_alloc_from_pool(dev, size, pool, cpu_addr,
>> + page = __dma_alloc_from_pool(dev, size, dma_pool->pool,
>> cpu_addr,
>> phys_addr_ok);
>> if (page)
>> return page;
>> @@ -296,12 +345,14 @@ struct page *dma_alloc_from_pool(struct device *dev,
>> size_t size,
-aneesh
