On 07/03/2020 06:26, Sergey Senozhatsky wrote: > On (20/03/06 15:04), Hans Verkuil wrote: > [..] >>> + /* >>> + * NOTE: dma-sg allocates memory using the page allocator directly, so >>> + * there is no memory consistency guarantee, hence dma-sg ignores DMA >>> + * attributes passed from the upper layer. That means that >>> + * V4L2_FLAG_MEMORY_NON_CONSISTENT has no effect on dma-sg buffers. >>> + */ >>> buf->pages = kvmalloc_array(buf->num_pages, sizeof(struct page *), >>> GFP_KERNEL | __GFP_ZERO); >>> if (!buf->pages) >>> @@ -470,6 +476,26 @@ static void vb2_dma_sg_dmabuf_ops_release(struct dma_buf *dbuf) >>> vb2_dma_sg_put(dbuf->priv); >>> } >>> >>> +static int vb2_dma_sg_dmabuf_ops_begin_cpu_access(struct dma_buf *dbuf, >>> + enum dma_data_direction direction) >> >> I suggest you use this style to avoid checkpatch warnings: >> >> static int >> vb2_dma_sg_dmabuf_ops_begin_cpu_access(struct dma_buf *dbuf, >> enum dma_data_direction direction) > > OK, will do. > > Just for information, my checkpatch doesn't warn me: > > $ ./scripts/checkpatch.pl outgoing/0010-videobuf2-add-begin-end-cpu_access-callbacks-to-dma-.patch We use the --strict option to checkpatch. Regards, Hans > total: 0 errors, 0 warnings, 46 lines checked > > outgoing/0010-videobuf2-add-begin-end-cpu_access-callbacks-to-dma-.patch has no obvious style problems and is ready for submission. > > -ss >
