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;
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <20191217032034.54897-1-senozhatsky@chromium.org>
 <20191217032034.54897-13-senozhatsky@chromium.org> <1c5198dc-db4e-47d6-0d8b-259fbbb6372f@xs4all.nl>
 <CAAFQd5DN0FSJ=pXG3J32AXocnbkR+AB8yKKDk0tZS4s7K04Z9Q@mail.gmail.com>
 <560ba621-5396-1ea9-625e-a9f83622e052@xs4all.nl> <CAAFQd5D27xaKhxg8UuPH6XXdzgBBsCeDL8wYw37r6AK+6sWcbg@mail.gmail.com>
 <c23618a9-4bf8-1d9a-6e52-d616c79ff289@xs4all.nl> <CAAFQd5BGA-mnirgwQJP_UHkNzpVvf19xeRu-n7GLQci8nYGB2A@mail.gmail.com>
 <20200204025021.GF41358@google.com>
In-Reply-To: <20200204025021.GF41358@google.com>
From:   Tomasz Figa <tfiga@chromium.org>
Date:   Thu, 6 Feb 2020 17:51:46 +0900
Message-ID: <CAAFQd5B1cDCHexRR7UaqhHuxOgbAZDFHrZEVA1E2bcH14Ve5_A@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH 12/15] videobuf2: add begin/end cpu_access callbacks
 to dma-sg
To:     Sergey Senozhatsky <senozhatsky@chromium.org>
Cc:     Hans Verkuil <hverkuil@xs4all.nl>,
        Hans Verkuil <hans.verkuil@cisco.com>,
        Mauro Carvalho Chehab <mchehab@kernel.org>,
        Kyungmin Park <kyungmin.park@samsung.com>,
        Marek Szyprowski <m.szyprowski@samsung.com>,
        Sakari Ailus <sakari.ailus@iki.fi>,
        Laurent Pinchart <laurent.pinchart@ideasonboard.com>,
        Pawel Osciak <posciak@chromium.org>,
        Linux Media Mailing List <linux-media@vger.kernel.org>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

On Tue, Feb 4, 2020 at 11:50 AM Sergey Senozhatsky
<senozhatsky@chromium.org> wrote:
>
> On (20/02/03 19:04), Tomasz Figa wrote:
> [..]
> > > I very much agree with that. But this should be very clearly documented.
> > > Should V4L2_CAP_MEMORY_NON_CONSISTENT always be set in this case?
> > >
> >
> > Yes, IMHO that would make sense. My understanding is that currently
> > the consistency of allocated memory is unspecified, so it can be
> > either. With V4L2_FLAG_MEMORY_NON_CONSISTENT, the userspace can
> > explicitly ask for inconsistent memory.
> >
> > Moreover, I'd vote for setting V4L2_CAP_MEMORY_NON_CONSISTENT when
> > V4L2_FLAG_MEMORY_NON_CONSISTENT is guaranteed to return inconsistent
> > memory to avoid "optional" features or "hints" without guaranteed
> > behavior.
>
> Documentation/DMA-attributes.txt says the following
>
>   DMA_ATTR_NON_CONSISTENT
>   -----------------------
>
>   DMA_ATTR_NON_CONSISTENT lets the platform to choose to return either
>   consistent or non-consistent memory as it sees fit.  By using this API,
>   you are guaranteeing to the platform that you have all the correct and
>   necessary sync points for this memory in the driver.

Good point. And I also realized that some platforms just have no way
to make the memory inconsistent, because they may have hardware
coherency.

Then we need to keep it a hint only.

Best regards,
Tomasz