On Tue, Apr 27, 2021 at 04:55:45PM -0600, Logan Gunthorpe wrote: > > Also, I see only 8 users of this function. How about just fix them all > > to support negative returns and use this as the p2p API instead of > > adding new API? > > Well there might be 8 users of dma_map_sg_attrs() but there are a very > large number of dma_map_sg(). Seems odd to me to single out the first as > requiring these changes, but leave the latter. At a high level I'm OK with it. dma_map_sg_attrs() is the extra extended version of dma_map_sg(), it already has a different signature, a different return code is not out of the question. dma_map_sg() is just the simple easy to use interface that can't do advanced stuff. > I'm not that opposed to this. But it will make this series a fair bit > longer to change the 8 map_sg_attrs() usages. Yes, but the result seems much nicer to not grow the DMA API further. Jason
