On Wed, 8 May 2019 15:46:42 +0200 (CEST)
Sebastian Ott <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> On Fri, 26 Apr 2019, Halil Pasic wrote:
> > static struct ccw_device * io_subchannel_allocate_dev(struct subchannel
> > *sch)
> > {
> [..]
> > + cdev->private = kzalloc(sizeof(struct ccw_device_private),
> > + GFP_KERNEL | GFP_DMA);
>
> Do we still need GFP_DMA here (since we now have cdev->private->dma_area)?
>
We probably do not. I kept it GFP_DMA to keep changes to the
minimum. Should changing this in your opinion be a part of this patch?
> > @@ -1062,6 +1082,14 @@ static int io_subchannel_probe(struct subchannel
> > *sch)
> > if (!io_priv)
> > goto out_schedule;
> >
> > + io_priv->dma_area = dma_alloc_coherent(&sch->dev,
> > + sizeof(*io_priv->dma_area),
> > + &io_priv->dma_area_dma, GFP_KERNEL);
>
> This needs GFP_DMA.
Christoph already answered this one. Thanks Christoph!
> You use a genpool for ccw_private->dma and not for iopriv->dma - looks
> kinda inconsistent.
>
Please have a look at patch #9. A virtio-ccw device uses the genpool of
it's ccw device (the pool from which ccw_private->dma is allicated) for
the ccw stuff it needs to do. AFAICT for a subchannel device and its API
all the DMA memory we need is iopriv->dma. So my thought was
constructing a genpool for that would be an overkill.
Are you comfortable with this answer, or should we change something?
Regards,
Halil
_______________________________________________
Virtualization mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/virtualization
