Hi Jepser,
> On Tue, 25 Jun 2019 18:06:18 +0300
> Ilias Apalodimas <ilias.apalodi...@linaro.org> wrote:
>
> > @@ -1059,7 +1059,23 @@ static void netsec_setup_tx_dring(struct netsec_priv
> > *priv)
> > static int netsec_setup_rx_dring(struct netsec_priv *priv)
> > {
> > struct netsec_desc_ring *dring = &priv->desc_ring[NETSEC_RING_RX];
> > - int i;
> > + struct page_pool_params pp_params = { 0 };
> > + int i, err;
> > +
> > + pp_params.order = 0;
> > + /* internal DMA mapping in page_pool */
> > + pp_params.flags = PP_FLAG_DMA_MAP;
> > + pp_params.pool_size = DESC_NUM;
> > + pp_params.nid = cpu_to_node(0);
> > + pp_params.dev = priv->dev;
> > + pp_params.dma_dir = DMA_FROM_DEVICE;
>
> I was going to complain about this DMA_FROM_DEVICE, until I noticed
> that in next patch you have:
>
> pp_params.dma_dir = xdp_prog ? DMA_BIDIRECTIONAL : DMA_FROM_DEVICE;
True. Since the first patch only adds page_pool support, i wanted to be clear
that DMA_BIDIRECTIONAL is only needed for XDP use cases (and especially XDP_TX)
>
> Making a note here to help other reviewers.
Thanks
>
> > + dring->page_pool = page_pool_create(&pp_params);
> > + if (IS_ERR(dring->page_pool)) {
> > + err = PTR_ERR(dring->page_pool);
> > + dring->page_pool = NULL;
> > + goto err_out;
> > + }
> >
Cheers
/Ilias
