On Wed, Apr 24, 2019 at 11:33:11AM -0700, Nicolin Chen wrote: > I feel it's similar to my previous set, which did most of these > internally except the renaming part. But Catalin had a concern > that some platforms might have limits on CMA range [1]. Will it > be still okay to do the fallback internally? > > [1: https://www.spinics.net/lists/arm-kernel/msg714295.html ]
Catalins statement is correct, but I don't see how it applies to your patch. Your patch just ensures that the fallback we have in most callers is uniformly applied everywhere. The non-iommu callers will still need to select a specific zone and/or retry just the page allocator with other flags if the CMA (or fallback) page doesn't match what they need. dma-direct does this correctly and I think the arm32 allocator does as well, although it is a bit hard to follow sometimes. _______________________________________________ iommu mailing list iommu@lists.linux-foundation.org https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/iommu
