On Fri, May 1, 2020 at 4:08 AM Robin Murphy <robin.mur...@arm.com> wrote:
>
> On 2020-05-01 11:21 am, Brian Starkey wrote:
> > Hi John,
> >
> > On Fri, May 01, 2020 at 07:39:48AM +0000, John Stultz wrote:
> >> This patch reworks the cma_heap initialization so that
> >> we expose both the default CMA region and any CMA regions
> >> tagged with "linux,cma-heap" in the device-tree.
> >>
> >> Cc: Rob Herring <robh...@kernel.org>
> >> Cc: Sumit Semwal <sumit.sem...@linaro.org>
> >> Cc: "Andrew F. Davis" <a...@ti.com>
> >> Cc: Benjamin Gaignard <benjamin.gaign...@linaro.org>
> >> Cc: Liam Mark <lm...@codeaurora.org>
> >> Cc: Pratik Patel <prat...@codeaurora.org>
> >> Cc: Laura Abbott <labb...@redhat.com>
> >> Cc: Brian Starkey <brian.star...@arm.com>
> >> Cc: Chenbo Feng <fe...@google.com>
> >> Cc: Alistair Strachan <astrac...@google.com>
> >> Cc: Sandeep Patil <sspa...@google.com>
> >> Cc: Hridya Valsaraju <hri...@google.com>
> >> Cc: Christoph Hellwig <h...@lst.de>
> >> Cc: Marek Szyprowski <m.szyprow...@samsung.com>
> >> Cc: Robin Murphy <robin.mur...@arm.com>
> >> Cc: Andrew Morton <a...@linux-foundation.org>
> >> Cc: devicet...@vger.kernel.org
> >> Cc: dri-de...@lists.freedesktop.org
> >> Cc: linux...@kvack.org
> >> Signed-off-by: John Stultz <john.stu...@linaro.org>
> >> ---
> >> drivers/dma-buf/heaps/cma_heap.c | 18 +++++++++---------
> >> 1 file changed, 9 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-)
> >>
> >> diff --git a/drivers/dma-buf/heaps/cma_heap.c
> >> b/drivers/dma-buf/heaps/cma_heap.c
> >> index 626cf7fd033a..dd154e2db101 100644
> >> --- a/drivers/dma-buf/heaps/cma_heap.c
> >> +++ b/drivers/dma-buf/heaps/cma_heap.c
> >> @@ -141,6 +141,11 @@ static int __add_cma_heap(struct cma *cma, void *data)
> >> {
> >> struct cma_heap *cma_heap;
> >> struct dma_heap_export_info exp_info;
> >> + struct cma *default_cma = dev_get_cma_area(NULL);
> >> +
> >> + /* We only add the default heap and explicitly tagged heaps */
> >> + if (cma != default_cma && !cma_dma_heap_enabled(cma))
> >> + return 0;
> >
> > Thinking about the pl111 thread[1], I'm wondering if we should also
> > let drivers call this directly to expose their CMA pools, even if they
> > aren't tagged for dma-heaps in DT. But perhaps that's too close to
> > policy.
>
> That sounds much like what my first thoughts were - apologies if I'm
> wildly off-base here, but as far as I understand:
>
> - Device drivers know whether they have their own "memory-region" or not.
> - Device drivers already have to do *something* to participate in dma-buf.
> - Device drivers know best how they make use of both the above.
> - Therefore couldn't it be left to drivers to choose whether to register
> their CMA regions as heaps, without having to mess with DT at all?
I guess I'm not opposed to this. But I guess I'd like to see some more
details? You're thinking the pl111 driver would add the
"memory-region" node itself?
Assuming that's the case, my only worry is what if that memory-region
node isn't a CMA area, but instead something like a carveout? Does the
driver need to parse enough of the dt to figure out where to register
the region as a heap?
thanks
-john
