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:   Mon, 24 Feb 2020 22:56:57 +0100
From:   Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>
To:     Ira Weiny <ira.weiny@intel.com>
Cc:     Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>, Jonas Bonn <jonas@southpole.se>,
        Stefan Kristiansson <stefan.kristiansson@saunalahti.fi>,
        Stafford Horne <shorne@gmail.com>,
        Marek Szyprowski <m.szyprowski@samsung.com>,
        Robin Murphy <robin.murphy@arm.com>,
        Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>,
        Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com>,
        openrisc@lists.librecores.org, iommu@lists.linux-foundation.org,
        linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, linux-arch@vger.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/5] dma-direct: provide a arch_dma_clear_uncached hook
Message-ID: <20200224215657.GA12618@lst.de>
References: <20200224194446.690816-1-hch@lst.de> <20200224194446.690816-5-hch@lst.de> <20200224215327.GB11565@iweiny-DESK2.sc.intel.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20200224215327.GB11565@iweiny-DESK2.sc.intel.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.17 (2007-11-01)
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

On Mon, Feb 24, 2020 at 01:53:28PM -0800, Ira Weiny wrote:
> > +	else if (IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_ARCH_HAS_DMA_CLEAR_UNCACHED))
> > +		arch_dma_clear_uncached(cpu_addr, size);
> 
> Isn't using arch_dma_clear_uncached() before patch 5 going to break
> bisectability?

Only if ARCH_HAS_DMA_CLEAR_UNCACHED is selected by anything, which
only happens in patch 5.