Hi Thomas.
> >
> > struct simap {
> > union {
> > void __iomem *vaddr_iomem;
> > void *vaddr;
> > };
> > bool is_iomem;
> > };
> >
> > Where simap is a shorthand for system_iomem_map
> > And it could al be stuffed into a include/linux/simap.h file.
> >
> > Not totally sold on the simap name - but wanted to come up with
> > something.
>
> Yes. Others, myself included, have suggested to use a name that does not
> imply a connection to the dma-buf framework, but no one has come up with
> a good name.
>
> I strongly dislike simap, as it's entirely non-obvious what it does.
> dma-buf-map is not actually wrong. The structures represents the mapping
> of a dma-able buffer in most cases.
>
> >
> > With this approach users do not have to pull in dma-buf to use it and
> > users will not confuse that this is only for dma-buf usage.
>
> There's no need to enable dma-buf. It's all in the header file without
> dependencies on dma-buf. It's really just the name.
>
> But there's something else to take into account. The whole issue here is
> that the buffer is disconnected from its originating driver, so we don't
> know which kind of memory ops we have to use. Thinking about it, I
> realized that no one else seemed to have this problem until now.
> Otherwise there would be a solution already. So maybe the dma-buf
> framework *is* the native use case for this data structure.
We have at least:
linux/fb.h:
union {
char __iomem *screen_base; /* Virtual address */
char *screen_buffer;
};
Which solve more or less the same problem.
> Anyway, if a better name than dma-buf-map comes in, I'm willing to
> rename the thing. Otherwise I intend to merge the patchset by the end of
> the week.
Well, the main thing is that I think this shoud be moved away from
dma-buf. But if indeed dma-buf is the only relevant user in drm then
I am totally fine with the current naming.
One alternative named that popped up in my head: struct sys_io_map {}
But again, if this is kept in dma-buf then I am fine with the current
naming.
In other words, if you continue to think this is mostly a dma-buf
thing all three patches are:
Acked-by: Sam Ravnborg <sam@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sam
_______________________________________________
Intel-gfx mailing list
Intel-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
