Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67;
Date:   Sun, 5 Aug 2018 00:25:06 -0700
From:   Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>
To:     "Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@redhat.com>
Cc:     Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>,
        Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@kernel.crashing.org>,
        Will Deacon <will.deacon@arm.com>,
        Anshuman Khandual <khandual@linux.vnet.ibm.com>,
        virtualization@lists.linux-foundation.org,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org,
        aik@ozlabs.ru, robh@kernel.org, joe@perches.com,
        elfring@users.sourceforge.net, david@gibson.dropbear.id.au,
        jasowang@redhat.com, mpe@ellerman.id.au, linuxram@us.ibm.com,
        haren@linux.vnet.ibm.com, paulus@samba.org,
        srikar@linux.vnet.ibm.com, robin.murphy@arm.com,
        jean-philippe.brucker@arm.com, marc.zyngier@arm.com
Subject: Re: [RFC 0/4] Virtio uses DMA API for all devices
Message-ID: <20180805072506.GA23288@infradead.org>
References: <20180802182959-mutt-send-email-mst@kernel.org>
 <82ccef6ec3d95ee43f3990a4a2d0aea87eb45e89.camel@kernel.crashing.org>
 <20180802200646-mutt-send-email-mst@kernel.org>
 <e9beb6bba5a7d05741e27e85b24a3b23ba7c2762.camel@kernel.crashing.org>
 <20180802225738-mutt-send-email-mst@kernel.org>
 <de4888b6457e220776e16a9c8958ff0886ffc66c.camel@kernel.crashing.org>
 <20180803070507.GA1344@infradead.org>
 <20180803221634-mutt-send-email-mst@kernel.org>
 <20180804081500.GA1455@infradead.org>
 <20180805030326-mutt-send-email-mst@kernel.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20180805030326-mutt-send-email-mst@kernel.org>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.9.2 (2017-12-15)
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

On Sun, Aug 05, 2018 at 03:09:55AM +0300, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> So in this case however I'm not sure what exactly do we want to add. It
> seems that from point of view of the device, there is nothing special -
> it just gets a PA and writes there.  It also seems that guest does not
> need to get any info from the device either. Instead guest itself needs
> device to DMA into specific addresses, for its own reasons.
> 
> It seems that the fact that within guest it's implemented using a bounce
> buffer and that it's easiest to do by switching virtio to use the DMA API
> isn't something virtio spec concerns itself with.

And that is exactly what we added bus_dma_mask for - the case where
the device itself has not limitation (or a bigger limitation), but
the platform limits the accessible dma ranges.  One typical case is
a PCIe root port that is only connected to the CPU through an
interconnect that is limited to 32 address bits for example.