From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1030415AbeCSSGG (ORCPT ); Mon, 19 Mar 2018 14:06:06 -0400 Received: from verein.lst.de ([213.95.11.211]:59574 "EHLO newverein.lst.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S965570AbeCSQDp (ORCPT ); Mon, 19 Mar 2018 12:03:45 -0400 Date: Mon, 19 Mar 2018 17:03:43 +0100 From: Christoph Hellwig To: Will Deacon Cc: Robin Murphy , Christoph Hellwig , x86@kernel.org, Tom Lendacky , Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Muli Ben-Yehuda , iommu@lists.linux-foundation.org, David Woodhouse , Catalin Marinas Subject: Re: [PATCH 12/14] dma-direct: handle the memory encryption bit in common code Message-ID: <20180319160343.GA29002@lst.de> References: <20180319103826.12853-1-hch@lst.de> <20180319103826.12853-13-hch@lst.de> <20180319152442.GA27915@lst.de> <5316b479-7e75-d62f-6b17-b6bece55187c@arm.com> <20180319154832.GD14916@arm.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20180319154832.GD14916@arm.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.17 (2007-11-01) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Mon, Mar 19, 2018 at 03:48:33PM +0000, Will Deacon wrote: > Why can't we just resolve the conflict by adding the underscores? We can solve the conflict easily that way. But that's not the point. The point is that I've been fighting hard to consolidate dma code given that the behavior really is common and not arch specific. And this one is another case like that: the fact that the non-coherent dma boundary is bigger than the exposed size is something that can easily happen elsewhere, so there is no need to duplicate a lot of code for that. Nevermind that the commit should at least be three different patches: (1) revert the broken original commit (2) increase the dma min alignment (3) put the swiotlb workaround in place