From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Laurent Pinchart Subject: Re: [PATCH V3 6/8] arm: dma-mapping: Reset the device's dma_ops Date: Fri, 26 May 2017 17:04:49 +0300 Message-ID: <1593204.iWar1lSZel@avalon> References: <1475600632-21289-1-git-send-email-sricharan@codeaurora.org> <7413479.FJ3cKQnUFA@avalon> <20170525150540.GJ22219@n2100.armlinux.org.uk> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <20170525150540.GJ22219-l+eeeJia6m9URfEZ8mYm6t73F7V6hmMc@public.gmane.org> List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: iommu-bounces-cunTk1MwBs9QetFLy7KEm3xJsTq8ys+cHZ5vskTnxNA@public.gmane.org Errors-To: iommu-bounces-cunTk1MwBs9QetFLy7KEm3xJsTq8ys+cHZ5vskTnxNA@public.gmane.org To: Russell King - ARM Linux Cc: will.deacon-5wv7dgnIgG8@public.gmane.org, iommu-cunTk1MwBs9QetFLy7KEm3xJsTq8ys+cHZ5vskTnxNA@public.gmane.org, srinivas.kandagatla-QSEj5FYQhm4dnm+yROfE0A@public.gmane.org, linux-arm-msm-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org, linux-arm-kernel-IAPFreCvJWM7uuMidbF8XUB+6BGkLq7r@public.gmane.org List-Id: linux-arm-msm@vger.kernel.org Hi Russell, On Thursday 25 May 2017 16:05:41 Russell King - ARM Linux wrote: > On Wed, May 24, 2017 at 02:26:13PM +0300, Laurent Pinchart wrote: > > Again, the patch I propose is the simplest v4.12-rc fix I can think of, > > short of reverting your complete IOMMU probe deferral patch series. Let's > > focus on the v4.12-rc fix, and then discuss how to move forward in v4.13 > > and beyond. > > Except, I don't think it fixes the problem that Sricharan is trying to > fix, namely that of DMA ops that have been setup, torn down, and are > trying to be re-setup again. You're right, it's two separate problems, and we need to fix them both. > The issue here is that results in a stale setup, because the dma_ops are > left in-place from the first iommu setup, but the iommu mapping has been > disposed of. > > Your patch only avoids the problem of tearing down someone else's DMA > ops. We need a combination of both patches together. Yes exactly. I should read e-mails to the end before starting typing the reply :-) > What needs to happen for Sricharan's problem to be resolved is: > > 1. move all of __arm_iommu_detach_device() into arm_iommu_detach_device(). > 2. replace the __arm_iommu_detach_device() call in > arm_teardown_iommu_dma_ops() with arm_iommu_detach_device(). > > as I don't see any need to have a different order in > arm_teardown_iommu_dma_ops(). -- Regards, Laurent Pinchart From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: laurent.pinchart@ideasonboard.com (Laurent Pinchart) Date: Fri, 26 May 2017 17:04:49 +0300 Subject: [PATCH V3 6/8] arm: dma-mapping: Reset the device's dma_ops In-Reply-To: <20170525150540.GJ22219@n2100.armlinux.org.uk> References: <1475600632-21289-1-git-send-email-sricharan@codeaurora.org> <7413479.FJ3cKQnUFA@avalon> <20170525150540.GJ22219@n2100.armlinux.org.uk> Message-ID: <1593204.iWar1lSZel@avalon> To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org Hi Russell, On Thursday 25 May 2017 16:05:41 Russell King - ARM Linux wrote: > On Wed, May 24, 2017 at 02:26:13PM +0300, Laurent Pinchart wrote: > > Again, the patch I propose is the simplest v4.12-rc fix I can think of, > > short of reverting your complete IOMMU probe deferral patch series. Let's > > focus on the v4.12-rc fix, and then discuss how to move forward in v4.13 > > and beyond. > > Except, I don't think it fixes the problem that Sricharan is trying to > fix, namely that of DMA ops that have been setup, torn down, and are > trying to be re-setup again. You're right, it's two separate problems, and we need to fix them both. > The issue here is that results in a stale setup, because the dma_ops are > left in-place from the first iommu setup, but the iommu mapping has been > disposed of. > > Your patch only avoids the problem of tearing down someone else's DMA > ops. We need a combination of both patches together. Yes exactly. I should read e-mails to the end before starting typing the reply :-) > What needs to happen for Sricharan's problem to be resolved is: > > 1. move all of __arm_iommu_detach_device() into arm_iommu_detach_device(). > 2. replace the __arm_iommu_detach_device() call in > arm_teardown_iommu_dma_ops() with arm_iommu_detach_device(). > > as I don't see any need to have a different order in > arm_teardown_iommu_dma_ops(). -- Regards, Laurent Pinchart