Re: [PATCH v2 2/2] drivers: remove force dma flag from buses

2018-03-23 Thread kbuild test robot 
Hi Nipun,

Thank you for the patch! Yet something to improve:

[auto build test ERROR on linus/master]
[also build test ERROR on v4.16-rc6 next-20180323]
[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/Nipun-Gupta/dma-mapping-move-dma-configuration-to-bus-infrastructure/20180323-232307
config: i386-randconfig-x014-201811 (attached as .config)
compiler: gcc-7 (Debian 7.3.0-1) 7.3.0
reproduce:
# save the attached .config to linux build tree
make ARCH=i386 

All errors (new ones prefixed by >>):

   drivers//bcma/main.c: In function 'bcma_of_fill_device':
>> drivers//bcma/main.c:210:2: error: too many arguments to function 
>> 'of_dma_configure'
 of_dma_configure(&core->dev, node, false);
 ^~~~
   In file included from include/linux/of_platform.h:12:0,
from drivers//bcma/main.c:17:
   include/linux/of_device.h:110:19: note: declared here
static inline int of_dma_configure(struct device *dev, struct device_node 
*np)
  ^~~~

vim +/of_dma_configure +210 drivers//bcma/main.c

   198  
   199  static void bcma_of_fill_device(struct device *parent,
   200  struct bcma_device *core)
   201  {
   202  struct device_node *node;
   203  
   204  node = bcma_of_find_child_device(parent, core);
   205  if (node)
   206  core->dev.of_node = node;
   207  
   208  core->irq = bcma_of_get_irq(parent, core, 0);
   209  
 > 210  of_dma_configure(&core->dev, node, false);
   211  }
   212  

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


.config.gz
Description: application/gzip
___
dri-devel mailing list
dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel

Re: [PATCH v2 2/2] drivers: remove force dma flag from buses

2018-03-23 Thread kbuild test robot 
Hi Nipun,

Thank you for the patch! Yet something to improve:

[auto build test ERROR on linus/master]
[also build test ERROR on v4.16-rc6 next-20180323]
[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/Nipun-Gupta/dma-mapping-move-dma-configuration-to-bus-infrastructure/20180323-232307
config: i386-randconfig-x013-201811 (attached as .config)
compiler: gcc-7 (Debian 7.3.0-1) 7.3.0
reproduce:
# save the attached .config to linux build tree
make ARCH=i386 

All errors (new ones prefixed by >>):

   drivers/base/dma-mapping.c: In function 'dma_common_configure':
>> drivers/base/dma-mapping.c:344:9: error: too many arguments to function 
>> 'of_dma_configure'
  ret = of_dma_configure(dev, dev->of_node, force_dma);
^~~~
   In file included from drivers/base/dma-mapping.c:13:0:
   include/linux/of_device.h:110:19: note: declared here
static inline int of_dma_configure(struct device *dev, struct device_node 
*np)
  ^~~~
--
   drivers/pci/pci-driver.c: In function 'pci_dma_configure':
>> drivers/pci/pci-driver.c:1544:9: error: too many arguments to function 
>> 'of_dma_configure'
  ret = of_dma_configure(dev, bridge->parent->of_node, true);
^~~~
   In file included from drivers/pci/pci-driver.c:21:0:
   include/linux/of_device.h:110:19: note: declared here
static inline int of_dma_configure(struct device *dev, struct device_node 
*np)
  ^~~~

vim +/of_dma_configure +344 drivers/base/dma-mapping.c

   332  
   333  /*
   334   * Common configuration to enable DMA API use for a device.
   335   * A bus can use this function in its 'dma_configure' callback, if
   336   * suitable for the bus.
   337   */
   338  int dma_common_configure(struct device *dev, bool force_dma)
   339  {
   340  enum dev_dma_attr attr;
   341  int ret = 0;
   342  
   343  if (dev->of_node) {
 > 344  ret = of_dma_configure(dev, dev->of_node, force_dma);
   345  } else if (has_acpi_companion(dev)) {
   346  attr = 
acpi_get_dma_attr(to_acpi_device_node(dev->fwnode));
   347  if (attr != DEV_DMA_NOT_SUPPORTED)
   348  ret = acpi_dma_configure(dev, attr);
   349  }
   350  
   351  return ret;
   352  }
   353  

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


.config.gz
Description: application/gzip
___
dri-devel mailing list
dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel

RE: [PATCH v2 2/2] drivers: remove force dma flag from buses

2018-03-22 Thread Nipun Gupta 


> -Original Message-
> From: Greg KH [mailto:gre...@linuxfoundation.org]
> Sent: Wednesday, March 21, 2018 15:05
> To: Nipun Gupta 
> Cc: robin.mur...@arm.com; h...@lst.de; li...@armlinux.org.uk;
> m.szyprow...@samsung.com; bhelg...@google.com; zaj...@gmail.com;
> andy.gr...@linaro.org; david.br...@linaro.org; dan.j.willi...@intel.com;
> vinod.k...@intel.com; thierry.red...@gmail.com; robh...@kernel.org;
> frowand.l...@gmail.com; jarkko.sakki...@linux.intel.com;
> rafael.j.wyso...@intel.com; dmitry.torok...@gmail.com; jo...@kernel.org;
> msucha...@suse.de; linux-ker...@vger.kernel.org; iommu@lists.linux-
> foundation.org; linux-wirel...@vger.kernel.org; linux-arm-
> m...@vger.kernel.org; linux-...@vger.kernel.org; dmaeng...@vger.kernel.org;
> dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org; linux-te...@vger.kernel.org;
> devicet...@vger.kernel.org; linux-...@vger.kernel.org; Bharat Bhushan
> ; Leo Li 
> Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 2/2] drivers: remove force dma flag from buses
> 
> On Wed, Mar 21, 2018 at 12:25:23PM +0530, Nipun Gupta wrote:
> > With each bus implementing its own DMA configuration callback,
> > there is no need for bus to explicitly have force_dma in its
> > global structure. This patch modifies of_dma_configure API to
> > accept an input parameter which specifies if implicit DMA
> > configuration is required even when it is not described by the
> > firmware.
> 
> Having to "remember" what that bool variable means on the end of the
> function call is a royal pain over time, right?
> 
> Why not just create a new function:
>   dma_common_configure_force(dma)
> that always does this?  Leave "dma_common_configure()" alone, and then
> wrap the old code with these two helper functions that call the 'core'
> code with the bool set properly?
> 
> That way you do not have to "know" what that parameter is, the function
> name just documents it automatically, so when you see it in the
> bus-specific code, no need to go and have to hunt for anything.  And if
> you are reading the dma core code, it's obvious what is happening as the
> functions are all right there.

How about we do not pass any flag in 'dma_common_configure()', and inside this
API we pass "true" to 'of_dma_configure()'? I am saying this because currently
both the busses (platform and AMBA) which uses 'dma_common_configure()' passes
"true" value. If we create additional 'dma_common_configure_force()', then
'dma_common_configure()' will not be used anytime and will become redundant.

If someday new busses come and they needs to use similar functionality which
'dma_common_configure()' provides, but with passing "false" to 
'of_dma_configure()',
then what you suggests of having two separate such API's will be more reasonable
and can be implemented?

Thanks,
Nipun

> 
> thanks,
> 
> greg k-h
___
dri-devel mailing list
dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel

RE: [PATCH v2 2/2] drivers: remove force dma flag from buses

2018-03-22 Thread Nipun Gupta 


> -Original Message-
> From: Christoph Hellwig [mailto:h...@lst.de]
> Sent: Thursday, March 22, 2018 13:49
> To: Nipun Gupta 
> 
> > --- a/drivers/dma/qcom/hidma_mgmt.c
> > +++ b/drivers/dma/qcom/hidma_mgmt.c
> > @@ -398,7 +398,7 @@ static int __init
> hidma_mgmt_of_populate_channels(struct device_node *np)
> > }
> > of_node_get(child);
> > new_pdev->dev.of_node = child;
> > -   of_dma_configure(&new_pdev->dev, child);
> > +   of_dma_configure(&new_pdev->dev, child, true);
> > /*
> >  * It is assumed that calling of_msi_configure is safe on
> >  * platforms with or without MSI support.
> 
> Where did we mark this bus as force_dma before?

I thought these devices to be on the platform bus as the device is of type
'struct platform_device', though I am not sure then why 'of_dma_configure()'
is called here. Is this not on platform bus?

> 
> > diff --git a/drivers/of/of_reserved_mem.c b/drivers/of/of_reserved_mem.c
> > index 9a4f4246..895c83e 100644
> > --- a/drivers/of/of_reserved_mem.c
> > +++ b/drivers/of/of_reserved_mem.c
> > @@ -353,7 +353,7 @@ int of_reserved_mem_device_init_by_idx(struct device
> *dev,
> > /* ensure that dma_ops is set for virtual devices
> >  * using reserved memory
> >  */
> > -   of_dma_configure(dev, np);
> > +   of_dma_configure(dev, np, true);
> 
> Did all the callers of this one really force dma?  I have a hard time
> untangling the call stacks unfortunately.

I see this API being called indirectly from NXP DPAA device driver which
is for platform bus devices. So I marked 'true' out here. There are more places
from where it is being called.

Thanks,
Nipun
___
dri-devel mailing list
dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel

[PATCH v2 2/2] drivers: remove force dma flag from buses

2018-03-22 Thread Nipun Gupta 
With each bus implementing its own DMA configuration callback,
there is no need for bus to explicitly have force_dma in its
global structure. This patch modifies of_dma_configure API to
accept an input parameter which specifies if implicit DMA
configuration is required even when it is not described by the
firmware.

Signed-off-by: Nipun Gupta 
---

Changes in v2:
  - This is a new change suggested by Robin and Christoph
and is added to the series.

 drivers/amba/bus.c| 3 +--
 drivers/base/dma-mapping.c| 4 ++--
 drivers/base/platform.c   | 3 +--
 drivers/bcma/main.c   | 2 +-
 drivers/dma/qcom/hidma_mgmt.c | 2 +-
 drivers/gpu/host1x/bus.c  | 5 ++---
 drivers/of/device.c   | 6 --
 drivers/of/of_reserved_mem.c  | 2 +-
 drivers/pci/pci-driver.c  | 3 +--
 include/linux/device.h| 4 
 include/linux/dma-mapping.h   | 2 +-
 include/linux/of_device.h | 4 +++-
 12 files changed, 18 insertions(+), 22 deletions(-)

diff --git a/drivers/amba/bus.c b/drivers/amba/bus.c
index 2fa1e8b..1d58348 100644
--- a/drivers/amba/bus.c
+++ b/drivers/amba/bus.c
@@ -174,7 +174,7 @@ static int amba_pm_runtime_resume(struct device *dev)
 
 static int amba_dma_configure(struct device *dev)
 {
-   return dma_common_configure(dev);
+   return dma_common_configure(dev, true);
 }
 
 static const struct dev_pm_ops amba_pm = {
@@ -202,7 +202,6 @@ struct bus_type amba_bustype = {
.uevent = amba_uevent,
.dma_configure  = amba_dma_configure,
.pm = &amba_pm,
-   .force_dma  = true,
 };
 
 static int __init amba_init(void)
diff --git a/drivers/base/dma-mapping.c b/drivers/base/dma-mapping.c
index 48f9af0..03f8584 100644
--- a/drivers/base/dma-mapping.c
+++ b/drivers/base/dma-mapping.c
@@ -335,13 +335,13 @@ void dma_common_free_remap(void *cpu_addr, size_t size, 
unsigned long vm_flags)
  * A bus can use this function in its 'dma_configure' callback, if
  * suitable for the bus.
  */
-int dma_common_configure(struct device *dev)
+int dma_common_configure(struct device *dev, bool force_dma)
 {
enum dev_dma_attr attr;
int ret = 0;
 
if (dev->of_node) {
-   ret = of_dma_configure(dev, dev->of_node);
+   ret = of_dma_configure(dev, dev->of_node, force_dma);
} else if (has_acpi_companion(dev)) {
attr = acpi_get_dma_attr(to_acpi_device_node(dev->fwnode));
if (attr != DEV_DMA_NOT_SUPPORTED)
diff --git a/drivers/base/platform.c b/drivers/base/platform.c
index d2d5891..154707c 100644
--- a/drivers/base/platform.c
+++ b/drivers/base/platform.c
@@ -1132,7 +1132,7 @@ int platform_pm_restore(struct device *dev)
 
 static int platform_dma_configure(struct device *dev)
 {
-   return dma_common_configure(dev);
+   return dma_common_configure(dev, true);
 }
 
 static const struct dev_pm_ops platform_dev_pm_ops = {
@@ -1148,7 +1148,6 @@ struct bus_type platform_bus_type = {
.uevent = platform_uevent,
.dma_configure  = platform_dma_configure,
.pm = &platform_dev_pm_ops,
-   .force_dma  = true,
 };
 EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(platform_bus_type);
 
diff --git a/drivers/bcma/main.c b/drivers/bcma/main.c
index e6986c7..fc1f4ac 100644
--- a/drivers/bcma/main.c
+++ b/drivers/bcma/main.c
@@ -207,7 +207,7 @@ static void bcma_of_fill_device(struct device *parent,
 
core->irq = bcma_of_get_irq(parent, core, 0);
 
-   of_dma_configure(&core->dev, node);
+   of_dma_configure(&core->dev, node, false);
 }
 
 unsigned int bcma_core_irq(struct bcma_device *core, int num)
diff --git a/drivers/dma/qcom/hidma_mgmt.c b/drivers/dma/qcom/hidma_mgmt.c
index 000c7019..d64edeb 100644
--- a/drivers/dma/qcom/hidma_mgmt.c
+++ b/drivers/dma/qcom/hidma_mgmt.c
@@ -398,7 +398,7 @@ static int __init hidma_mgmt_of_populate_channels(struct 
device_node *np)
}
of_node_get(child);
new_pdev->dev.of_node = child;
-   of_dma_configure(&new_pdev->dev, child);
+   of_dma_configure(&new_pdev->dev, child, true);
/*
 * It is assumed that calling of_msi_configure is safe on
 * platforms with or without MSI support.
diff --git a/drivers/gpu/host1x/bus.c b/drivers/gpu/host1x/bus.c
index fa9896d..211eb6b 100644
--- a/drivers/gpu/host1x/bus.c
+++ b/drivers/gpu/host1x/bus.c
@@ -317,7 +317,7 @@ static int host1x_device_match(struct device *dev, struct 
device_driver *drv)
 static int host1x_dma_configure(struct device *dev)
 {
if (dev->of_node)
-   return of_dma_configure(dev, dev->of_node);
+   return of_dma_configure(dev, dev->of_node, true);
 
return 0;
 }
@@ -336,7 +336,6 @@ struct bus_type host1x_bus_type = {
.match = host1x_device_match,
.dma_configure  = host1x_dma_configure,
.pm = &host1x_device_pm_ops,
-   .force_dma = true,
 };
 
 static void __host

Re: [PATCH v2 2/2] drivers: remove force dma flag from buses

2018-03-22 Thread Christoph Hellwig 
> --- a/drivers/dma/qcom/hidma_mgmt.c
> +++ b/drivers/dma/qcom/hidma_mgmt.c
> @@ -398,7 +398,7 @@ static int __init hidma_mgmt_of_populate_channels(struct 
> device_node *np)
>   }
>   of_node_get(child);
>   new_pdev->dev.of_node = child;
> - of_dma_configure(&new_pdev->dev, child);
> + of_dma_configure(&new_pdev->dev, child, true);
>   /*
>* It is assumed that calling of_msi_configure is safe on
>* platforms with or without MSI support.

Where did we mark this bus as force_dma before?

> diff --git a/drivers/of/of_reserved_mem.c b/drivers/of/of_reserved_mem.c
> index 9a4f4246..895c83e 100644
> --- a/drivers/of/of_reserved_mem.c
> +++ b/drivers/of/of_reserved_mem.c
> @@ -353,7 +353,7 @@ int of_reserved_mem_device_init_by_idx(struct device *dev,
>   /* ensure that dma_ops is set for virtual devices
>* using reserved memory
>*/
> - of_dma_configure(dev, np);
> + of_dma_configure(dev, np, true);

Did all the callers of this one really force dma?  I have a hard time
untangling the call stacks unfortunately.

___
dri-devel mailing list
dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel

Re: [PATCH v2 2/2] drivers: remove force dma flag from buses

2018-03-21 Thread Greg KH 
On Wed, Mar 21, 2018 at 04:28:46PM +, Nipun Gupta wrote:
> 
> 
> > -Original Message-
> > From: Greg KH [mailto:gre...@linuxfoundation.org]
> > Sent: Wednesday, March 21, 2018 15:05
> > To: Nipun Gupta 
> > Cc: robin.mur...@arm.com; h...@lst.de; li...@armlinux.org.uk;
> > m.szyprow...@samsung.com; bhelg...@google.com; zaj...@gmail.com;
> > andy.gr...@linaro.org; david.br...@linaro.org; dan.j.willi...@intel.com;
> > vinod.k...@intel.com; thierry.red...@gmail.com; robh...@kernel.org;
> > frowand.l...@gmail.com; jarkko.sakki...@linux.intel.com;
> > rafael.j.wyso...@intel.com; dmitry.torok...@gmail.com; jo...@kernel.org;
> > msucha...@suse.de; linux-ker...@vger.kernel.org; iommu@lists.linux-
> > foundation.org; linux-wirel...@vger.kernel.org; linux-arm-
> > m...@vger.kernel.org; linux-...@vger.kernel.org; dmaeng...@vger.kernel.org;
> > dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org; linux-te...@vger.kernel.org;
> > devicet...@vger.kernel.org; linux-...@vger.kernel.org; Bharat Bhushan
> > ; Leo Li 
> > Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 2/2] drivers: remove force dma flag from buses
> > 
> > On Wed, Mar 21, 2018 at 12:25:23PM +0530, Nipun Gupta wrote:
> > > With each bus implementing its own DMA configuration callback,
> > > there is no need for bus to explicitly have force_dma in its
> > > global structure. This patch modifies of_dma_configure API to
> > > accept an input parameter which specifies if implicit DMA
> > > configuration is required even when it is not described by the
> > > firmware.
> > 
> > Having to "remember" what that bool variable means on the end of the
> > function call is a royal pain over time, right?
> > 
> > Why not just create a new function:
> > dma_common_configure_force(dma)
> > that always does this?  Leave "dma_common_configure()" alone, and then
> > wrap the old code with these two helper functions that call the 'core'
> > code with the bool set properly?
> > 
> > That way you do not have to "know" what that parameter is, the function
> > name just documents it automatically, so when you see it in the
> > bus-specific code, no need to go and have to hunt for anything.  And if
> > you are reading the dma core code, it's obvious what is happening as the
> > functions are all right there.
> 
> How about we do not pass any flag in 'dma_common_configure()', and inside this
> API we pass "true" to 'of_dma_configure()'? I am saying this because currently
> both the busses (platform and AMBA) which uses 'dma_common_configure()' passes
> "true" value. If we create additional 'dma_common_configure_force()', then
> 'dma_common_configure()' will not be used anytime and will become redundant.
> 
> If someday new busses come and they needs to use similar functionality which
> 'dma_common_configure()' provides, but with passing "false" to 
> 'of_dma_configure()',
> then what you suggests of having two separate such API's will be more 
> reasonable
> and can be implemented?

If that makes things "simple", yes, sounds good.

greg k-h
___
dri-devel mailing list
dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel

Re: [PATCH v2 2/2] drivers: remove force dma flag from buses

2018-03-21 Thread Greg KH 
On Wed, Mar 21, 2018 at 12:25:23PM +0530, Nipun Gupta wrote:
> With each bus implementing its own DMA configuration callback,
> there is no need for bus to explicitly have force_dma in its
> global structure. This patch modifies of_dma_configure API to
> accept an input parameter which specifies if implicit DMA
> configuration is required even when it is not described by the
> firmware.

Having to "remember" what that bool variable means on the end of the
function call is a royal pain over time, right?

Why not just create a new function:
dma_common_configure_force(dma)
that always does this?  Leave "dma_common_configure()" alone, and then
wrap the old code with these two helper functions that call the 'core'
code with the bool set properly?

That way you do not have to "know" what that parameter is, the function
name just documents it automatically, so when you see it in the
bus-specific code, no need to go and have to hunt for anything.  And if
you are reading the dma core code, it's obvious what is happening as the
functions are all right there.

thanks,

greg k-h
___
dri-devel mailing list
dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel