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:   Fri, 6 Sep 2019 10:43:00 -0400
From:   Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk <konrad.wilk@oracle.com>
To:     Boris Ostrovsky <boris.ostrovsky@oracle.com>
Cc:     Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>,
        Stefano Stabellini <sstabellini@kernel.org>,
        Juergen Gross <jgross@suse.com>, x86@kernel.org,
        linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
        xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org, iommu@lists.linux-foundation.org,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 09/11] swiotlb-xen: simplify cache maintainance
Message-ID: <20190906144300.GD7824@char.us.oracle.com>
References: <20190905113408.3104-1-hch@lst.de>
 <20190905113408.3104-10-hch@lst.de>
 <e4f9b393-2631-57cd-f42f-3581e75ab9a3@oracle.com>
 <20190906140123.GA9894@lst.de>
 <ca88e7b8-08ca-51b2-0c77-c828d92da0db@oracle.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <ca88e7b8-08ca-51b2-0c77-c828d92da0db@oracle.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.9.1 (2017-09-22)
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

On Fri, Sep 06, 2019 at 10:19:01AM -0400, Boris Ostrovsky wrote:
> On 9/6/19 10:01 AM, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> > On Fri, Sep 06, 2019 at 09:52:12AM -0400, Boris Ostrovsky wrote:
> >> We need nop definitions of these two for x86.
> >>
> >> Everything builds now but that's probably because the calls are under
> >> 'if (!dev_is_dma_coherent(dev))' which is always false so compiler
> >> optimized is out. I don't think we should rely on that.
> > That is how a lot of the kernel works.  Provide protypes only for code
> > that is semantically compiled, but can't ever be called due to
> > IS_ENABLED() checks.  It took me a while to get used to it, but it
> > actually is pretty nice as the linker does the work for you to check
> > that it really is never called.  Much better than say a BUILD_BUG_ON().
> 
> 
> (with corrected Juergen's email)
> 
> I know about IS_ENABLED() but I didn't realize that this is allowed for
> compile-time inlines and such as well.
> 
> Anyway, for non-ARM bits
> 
> Reviewed-by: Boris Ostrovsky <boris.ostrovsky@oracle.com>

Acked-by: Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk <konrad.wilk@oracle.com>

as well.

Albeit folks have tested this under x86 Xen with 'swiotlb=force' right?

I can test it myself but it will take a couple of days.
> 
> If this goes via Xen tree then the first couple of patches need an ack
> from ARM maintainers.
> 
> -boris