On 02/20/2017 10:05 PM, Chen Feng wrote: > Hi Laura, > > When we enable kernel v4.4 or newer version on our platform, we meet the issue > of flushing cache without reference device. It seems that this patch set is > a solution. I'm curious the progress of the discussion. Do you have any plan > to fix it in v4.4 and newer kernel verison? > No, I've abandoned this approach based on feedback. The APIs had too much potential for incorrect usage. I'm ripping out the implicit caching in Ion and switching it to a model where there should always be a device available. What's your use case where you don't have a device structure? Thanks, Laura > On 2016/9/14 2:41, Laura Abbott wrote: >> On 09/13/2016 08:14 AM, Will Deacon wrote: >>> On Tue, Sep 13, 2016 at 08:02:20AM -0700, Laura Abbott wrote: >>>> On 09/13/2016 02:19 AM, Will Deacon wrote: >>>>> On Mon, Sep 12, 2016 at 02:32:56PM -0700, Laura Abbott wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> arm64 may need to guarantee the caches are synced. Implement versions of >>>>>> the kernel_force_cache API to allow this. >>>>>> >>>>>> Signed-off-by: Laura Abbott <labbott@xxxxxxxxxx> >>>>>> --- >>>>>> v3: Switch to calling cache operations directly instead of relying on >>>>>> DMA mapping. >>>>>> --- >>>>>> arch/arm64/include/asm/cacheflush.h | 8 ++++++++ >>>>>> arch/arm64/mm/cache.S | 24 ++++++++++++++++++++---- >>>>>> arch/arm64/mm/flush.c | 11 +++++++++++ >>>>>> 3 files changed, 39 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-) >>>>> >>>>> I'm really hesitant to expose these cache routines as an API solely to >>>>> support a driver sitting in staging/. I appreciate that there's a chicken >>>>> and egg problem here, but we *really* don't want people using these routines >>>>> in preference to the DMA API, and I fear that we'll simply grow a bunch >>>>> more users of these things if we promote it as an API like you're proposing. >>>>> >>>>> Can the code not be contained under staging/, as part of ion? >>>>> >>>> >>>> I proposed that in V1 and it was suggested I make it a proper API >>>> >>>> http://www.mail-archive.com/driverdev-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx/msg47654.html >>>> http://www.mail-archive.com/driverdev-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx/msg47672.html >>> >>> :/ then I guess we're in disagreement. If ion really needs this stuff >>> (which I don't fully grok), perhaps we should be exposing something at >>> a higher level from the architecture, so it really can't be used for >>> anything other than ion. >> >> I talked/complained about this at a past plumbers. The gist is that Ion >> ends up acting as a fake DMA layer for clients. It doesn't match nicely >> because clients can allocate both coherent and non-coherent memory. >> Trying to use dma_map doesn't work because a) a device for coherency isn't >> known at allocation time b) it kills performance. Part of the motivation >> for taking this approach is to avoid the need to rework the existing >> Android userspace and keep the existing behavior, as terrible as it >> is. Having Ion out of staging and not actually usable isn't helpful. >> >> I'll give this all some more thought and hopefully have one or two more >> proposals before Connect/Plumbers. >> >>> >>> Will >>> >> >> Thanks, >> Laura >> _______________________________________________ >> Linaro-mm-sig mailing list >> Linaro-mm-sig@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx >> https://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/linaro-mm-sig > > > _______________________________________________ > linux-arm-kernel mailing list > linux-arm-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel > _______________________________________________ devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://driverdev.linuxdriverproject.org/mailman/listinfo/driverdev-devel
