From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751980Ab2AZJ6T (ORCPT ); Thu, 26 Jan 2012 04:58:19 -0500 Received: from perceval.ideasonboard.com ([95.142.166.194]:44501 "EHLO perceval.ideasonboard.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750865Ab2AZJ6S (ORCPT ); Thu, 26 Jan 2012 04:58:18 -0500 From: Laurent Pinchart To: "Semwal, Sumit" Subject: Re: [Linaro-mm-sig] [PATCH 1/3] dma-buf: Introduce dma buffer sharing mechanism Date: Thu, 26 Jan 2012 10:58:25 +0100 User-Agent: KMail/1.13.7 (Linux/3.1.10-gentoo-r1; KDE/4.7.4; x86_64; ; ) Cc: linaro-mm-sig@lists.linaro.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, linux-mm@kvack.org, dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org, linux-media@vger.kernel.org, arnd@arndb.de, airlied@redhat.com, linux@arm.linux.org.uk, patches@linaro.org, jesse.barker@linaro.org, daniel@ffwll.ch References: <1324891397-10877-1-git-send-email-sumit.semwal@ti.com> <201201201423.46858.laurent.pinchart@ideasonboard.com> In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <201201261058.27098.laurent.pinchart@ideasonboard.com> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Hi Sumit, On Wednesday 25 January 2012 14:56:52 Semwal, Sumit wrote: > On Fri, Jan 20, 2012 at 6:53 PM, Laurent Pinchart wrote: > > Hi Summit, > > > > Sorry for the late review. I know that this code is now in mainline, but > > I still have a couple of comments. I'll send patches if you agree with > > them. > > Hi Laurent, > > Thanks for your review; apologies for being late in replying - I was > OoO for last couple of days. No worries. [snip] > Let me know if you'd send patches for these, or should I just go ahead and > correct. I'll send patches. Another small comment. The map_dma_buf operation is defined as struct sg_table * (*map_dma_buf)(struct dma_buf_attachment *, enum dma_data_direction); If we want to let exporters cache the sg_table we should return a const struct sg_table *. unmap_dma_buf will then take a const pointer as well, which would need to be cast to a non-const pointer internally. What's your opinion on that ? -- Regards, Laurent Pinchart