On Fri, Aug 24, 2018 at 10:15 AM Sam Ravnborg <sam@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > Hi Andrey. > > > This series is a result of debugging FEC and uSDHC failures on > > i.MX8MQ. Patches 1 and 2 are pretty straightforward and shouldn't be > > controversial. Patch 3, OTOH, may or may not be a good way to solve > > this problem, but it's a good way to start a discussion on the subject > > which is my main goal here. > > > > Feedback is welcome! > > > > Thanks, > > Andrey Smirnov > > > > Andrey Smirnov (3): > > mci: imx-esdhc: Bail out if DMA address is larger than 32-bits > > net: fec: Bail out if DMA address is larger than 32-bits > > In the above patches the checks are distributed to the > users. Are there any reason why we could not centralize this > check in the dma code? We definitely can. As Sascha already pointed out this can be folded into dma_mapping_error(). > As I assume it is everyone that is constrained to the > 32BIT address space. > > And do we really need these checks if we teach > malloc to only provide memory that is DMA'able? > I'd prefer to keep them since I'd rather not have a situation where there's a chance of silent, hard to detect, failure, since it manifests in really bizarre ways (in my case Ethernet would stop working after I would probe eMMC). Also, once all of the error checking is folded into dma_mapping_error() it wouldn't be that much of code anyway. Thanks, Andrey Smirnov _______________________________________________ barebox mailing list barebox@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/barebox
