Re: [PATCH 04/12] soc: sifive: ccache: Add non-coherent DMA handling

From: Conor Dooley <conor.dooley@microchip.com>
To: Emil Renner Berthing <emil.renner.berthing@canonical.com>
Cc: Conor Dooley <conor@kernel.org>,
	Cristian Ciocaltea <cristian.ciocaltea@collabora.com>,
	Lee Jones <lee@kernel.org>, Rob Herring <robh+dt@kernel.org>,
	Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@linaro.org>,
	"David S. Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>,
	Eric Dumazet <edumazet@google.com>,
	Jakub Kicinski <kuba@kernel.org>,
	"Paolo Abeni" <pabeni@redhat.com>,
	Emil Renner Berthing <kernel@esmil.dk>,
	"Palmer Dabbelt" <palmer@dabbelt.com>,
	Paul Walmsley <paul.walmsley@sifive.com>,
	Albert Ou <aou@eecs.berkeley.edu>,
	Giuseppe Cavallaro <peppe.cavallaro@st.com>,
	Alexandre Torgue <alexandre.torgue@foss.st.com>,
	Jose Abreu <joabreu@synopsys.com>,
	Maxime Coquelin <mcoquelin.stm32@gmail.com>,
	Richard Cochran <richardcochran@gmail.com>,
	Sagar Kadam <sagar.kadam@sifive.com>,
	Yanhong Wang <yanhong.wang@starfivetech.com>,
	<devicetree@vger.kernel.org>, <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	<netdev@vger.kernel.org>, <linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org>,
	<linux-stm32@st-md-mailman.stormreply.com>,
	<linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>, <kernel@collabora.com>,
	<daire.mcnamara@microchip.com>, <atishp@atishpatra.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 04/12] soc: sifive: ccache: Add non-coherent DMA handling
Date: Mon, 20 Feb 2023 11:43:54 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <Y/Nc+u2tP07zjdn5@wendy> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAJM55Z_poY3dVu9fQ1W1VQw3V=8VdVKc1+qUcdHduM1aAveJUQ@mail.gmail.com>

[-- Attachment #1.1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1859 bytes --]

On Sun, Feb 19, 2023 at 10:32:52PM +0100, Emil Renner Berthing wrote:
> On Thu, 16 Feb 2023 at 19:51, Conor Dooley <conor@kernel.org> wrote:
> >
> > Emil,
> >
> > +CC Daire
> >
> > On Sat, Feb 11, 2023 at 05:18:13AM +0200, Cristian Ciocaltea wrote:
> > > From: Emil Renner Berthing <kernel@esmil.dk>
> > >
> > > Add functions to flush the caches and handle non-coherent DMA.
> > >
> > > Signed-off-by: Emil Renner Berthing <kernel@esmil.dk>
> > > [replace <asm/cacheflush.h> with <linux/cacheflush.h>]
> > > Signed-off-by: Cristian Ciocaltea <cristian.ciocaltea@collabora.com>
> > > ---
> >
> > > +void *sifive_ccache_set_uncached(void *addr, size_t size)
> > > +{
> > > +     phys_addr_t phys_addr = __pa(addr) + uncached_offset;
> > > +     void *mem_base;
> > > +
> > > +     mem_base = memremap(phys_addr, size, MEMREMAP_WT);
> > > +     if (!mem_base) {
> > > +             pr_err("%s memremap failed for addr %p\n", __func__, addr);
> > > +             return ERR_PTR(-EINVAL);
> > > +     }
> > > +
> > > +     return mem_base;
> > > +}
> >
> > The rest of this I either get b/c we did it, or will become moot so I
> > amn't worried about it, but can you please explain this, in particular
> > the memremap that you're doing here?
> 
> No, I can't really. As we talked about it's also based on a prototype
> by Atish. I'm sure you know that the general idea is that we want to
> return a pointer that accesses the same physical memory, but through
> the uncached alias.

Yah, I follow all the rest of what's going on - it's just this bit of it
that I don't.

> I can't tell you exactly why it's done this way
> though, sorry.

I had a bit of a look on lore, but don't really see anything there that
contained any discussion of what was going on here.

Adding Atish in the off-chance that he remembers!

[-- Attachment #1.2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 228 bytes --]

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/plain, Size: 161 bytes --]

_______________________________________________
linux-riscv mailing list
linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-riscv