Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751184AbdL0Kgm (ORCPT ); Wed, 27 Dec 2017 05:36:42 -0500 Received: from heliosphere.sirena.org.uk ([172.104.155.198]:45304 "EHLO heliosphere.sirena.org.uk" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750790AbdL0Kgk (ORCPT ); Wed, 27 Dec 2017 05:36:40 -0500 Date: Wed, 27 Dec 2017 10:36:09 +0000 From: Mark Brown To: Trent Piepho Cc: "linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org" , "linux@armlinux.org.uk" , "cyrille.pitchen@wedev4u.fr" , "dwmw2@infradead.org" , "computersforpeace@gmail.com" , "boris.brezillon@free-electrons.com" , "vigneshr@ti.com" , "richard@nod.at" , "marek.vasut@gmail.com" , "linux-spi@vger.kernel.org" , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , "nicolas.ferre@microchip.com" , "robh@kernel.org" , "radu.pirea@microchip.com" , "devicetree@vger.kernel.org" Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/3] mtd: spi-nor: fix DMA-unsafe buffer issue between MTD and SPI Message-ID: <20171227103609.GQ1827@finisterre> References: <1514313927.26695.19.camel@impinj.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha512; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="hIO1AjEoFJ7b3ahE" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1514313927.26695.19.camel@impinj.com> X-Cookie: Semper Fi, dude. User-Agent: Mutt/1.9.1 (2017-09-22) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1336 Lines: 34 --hIO1AjEoFJ7b3ahE Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Tue, Dec 26, 2017 at 06:45:28PM +0000, Trent Piepho wrote: > Or, since this only fixes instances of DMA-unsafe buffers used in > access to SPI NOR flash chips, and since there are other SPI master > interface users, those chip specific fixes in some/all spi master > drivers are still needed to fix transfers not originated via spi-nor?=20 SPI client drivers are *supposed* to use DMA safe memory already. How often that happens in cases where it matters is a separate question, we definitely have users with smaller transfers that don't do the right thing but they're normally done using PIO anyway. --hIO1AjEoFJ7b3ahE Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iQEzBAABCgAdFiEEreZoqmdXGLWf4p/qJNaLcl1Uh9AFAlpDd5gACgkQJNaLcl1U h9AEpgf/RtY0/PG8AYuqJuqcXHvaDEP59zvItyFKdgesM7P9Wu7LNe0mL1F+jPb8 rD+jQ9AY0Ks7Q1wcjx8p8PJQdc25ybQoHrAfPqGtHbxlP7QsmCk1bbFJQ8zElHES cL969cO2GYxfb/uxpg0+Gl4OPqJs9CTkyzHphGgYZ8fIrbhCMbFmfjnuU4NcRuwF ODAsdhhWZRN4JxB+JAlpFy9KgSV59I/82alu4QhVuZcsuicDymafDb/Cx3EQ/inO nsdkp2g0nt4e9CNP6N5UUT6Chbah/oRNT3YMg5Zn3ez8IwmSq9t/82GoxEOYGIty OKq5AwLtmn2uVDAcJ+cfldZ4yCBGxA== =8I+R -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --hIO1AjEoFJ7b3ahE--