Re: Regarding patch: dmaengine: remove DMA_SG as it is dead code in kernel

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 




On 04/17/2018 12:58 PM, Sinan Kaya wrote:
> On 4/17/2018 12:12 PM, Dave Jiang wrote:
>>
>> On 04/13/2018 07:12 PM, Sujeev Dias wrote:
>>> Hi
>>>
>>> Can we please revert this patch because it breaks qcom dma-engine drivers and many consumers after
>>> we propagated to 4.14 kernel.
>>>
>>> commit: c678fa66341c7b82a57cfed0ba3656162e970f99
>>> dmaengine: remove DMA_SG as it is dead code in kernel
>>>
>>> I don't see any alternate methods we can use either. We cannot use standard dma_memcpy
>>> api's since argument for both src and destination dma_addr.  Because dma mapping has to 
>>> be done by dma controller (due to smmu/sid configurations), client must pass host DDR
>>> address as a cpu address not dma_addr.
>>>
>>> Thanks
>>> Sujeev
>>>
>> Sujeev,
>> At least IMO, when you don't have in kernel upstream consumer for the
>> code, it's dead code for the kernel. In the end, it's Vinod's call.
>> However, I do think in the future we will need support for DMA engines
>> that want to take virtual memory addresses instead of DMA addresses with
>> SMMU/SID type of implementation. So something new needs to be introduced....
> 
> If I remember this right, another implementation was going to replace DMA_SG.
> DMA_SG got reverted but the new implementation wasn't put in place for some
> reason.

Yes I was in the process of pushing something but it ended up not being
beneficial at this time so it on hold right now. Although the removal of
DMA_SG was part of a clean up and not tied to that new functionality. If
Vinod feel like it should be reverted I have no objection. I still would
like to see proper support for virtual memory etc eventually. But at
least for me it'll take a bit for me to get to work on that, but
hopefully soon.

> 
> Given we have few users of DMA Engine, I believe we should try to keep as
> much functionality as possible in the kernel to allow new features to be
> developed rather than limiting people's choices.
> 

Would love to see more in kernel consumers for dmaengine. Maybe things
that help accelerate core kernel bits? :)
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe dmaengine" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html



[Index of Archives]     [Linux Kernel]     [Linux ARM (vger)]     [Linux ARM MSM]     [Linux Omap]     [Linux Arm]     [Linux Tegra]     [Fedora ARM]     [Linux for Samsung SOC]     [eCos]     [Linux PCI]     [Linux Fastboot]     [Gcc Help]     [Git]     [DCCP]     [IETF Announce]     [Security]     [Linux MIPS]     [Yosemite Campsites]

  Powered by Linux