On Wed, Apr 07, 2021 at 09:52:35PM -0700, Isaac J. Manjarres wrote:
> The PTE methods currently operate on a single entry. In preparation
> for manipulating multiple PTEs in one map or unmap call, allow them
> to handle multiple PTEs.
>
> Signed-off-by: Isaac J. Manjarres <isa...@codeaurora.org>
> Suggested-by: Robin Murphy <robin.mur...@arm.com>
> ---
> drivers/iommu/io-pgtable-arm.c | 78 +++++++++++++++++++---------------
> 1 file changed, 44 insertions(+), 34 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/iommu/io-pgtable-arm.c b/drivers/iommu/io-pgtable-arm.c
> index 87def58e79b5..ea66b10c04c4 100644
> --- a/drivers/iommu/io-pgtable-arm.c
> +++ b/drivers/iommu/io-pgtable-arm.c
> @@ -232,20 +232,23 @@ static void __arm_lpae_free_pages(void *pages, size_t
> size,
> free_pages((unsigned long)pages, get_order(size));
> }
>
> -static void __arm_lpae_sync_pte(arm_lpae_iopte *ptep,
> +static void __arm_lpae_sync_pte(arm_lpae_iopte *ptep, int num_entries,
> struct io_pgtable_cfg *cfg)
> {
> dma_sync_single_for_device(cfg->iommu_dev, __arm_lpae_dma_addr(ptep),
> - sizeof(*ptep), DMA_TO_DEVICE);
> + sizeof(*ptep) * num_entries, DMA_TO_DEVICE);
> }
Have you tested this with CONFIG_DMA_API_DEBUG=y? I _think_ it should be
ok as long as we don't attempt to sync across a page boundary, but it would
be good to give it a spin just to check.
Will
_______________________________________________
iommu mailing list
iommu@lists.linux-foundation.org
https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/iommu
