Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.18;
Date:   Tue, 9 Jun 2020 14:50:55 -0700 (PDT)
From:   Stefano Stabellini <sstabellini@kernel.org>
To:     Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>
cc:     Stefano Stabellini <sstabellini@kernel.org>, jgross@suse.com,
        boris.ostrovsky@oracle.com, konrad.wilk@oracle.com,
        xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
        tamas@tklengyel.com, roman@zededa.com,
        Stefano Stabellini <stefano.stabellini@xilinx.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 10/11] xen/arm: introduce phys/dma translations in
 xen_dma_sync_for_*
In-Reply-To: <20200609053949.GA26473@infradead.org>
Message-ID: <alpine.DEB.2.21.2006091326380.2815@sstabellini-ThinkPad-T480s>
References: <alpine.DEB.2.21.2006031506590.6774@sstabellini-ThinkPad-T480s> <20200603222247.11681-10-sstabellini@kernel.org> <20200608071221.GF15742@infradead.org> <alpine.DEB.2.21.2006081614530.2815@sstabellini-ThinkPad-T480s> <20200609053802.GB3015@infradead.org>
 <20200609053949.GA26473@infradead.org>
User-Agent: Alpine 2.21 (DEB 202 2017-01-01)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

On Mon, 8 Jun 2020, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 08, 2020 at 10:38:02PM -0700, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> > On Mon, Jun 08, 2020 at 05:38:28PM -0700, Stefano Stabellini wrote:
> > > Yeah, the pfn_valid check is a bit weird by definition because we are
> > > using it to understand whether the address belong to us or to another
> > > VM. To do the pfn_valid check we need to translate the dma address into
> > > something the CPU understands, hence, the dma_to_phys call.
> > > 
> > > Why can't we use the already-provided paddr? Because paddr has been
> > > translated twice:
> > > 1) from dma to maybe-foreign phys address (could be ours, or another VM)
> > > 2) from maybe-foreign address to local (using our local mapping of the foreign page)
> > > 
> > > In fact, it would be clearer if we had all three addresses as parameters
> > > of xen_dma_sync_for_cpu: the dma address, the maybe-foreign physical
> > > address (we tend to call it xenbus address, baddr), the local physical
> > > address. Something like:
> > 
> > I think instead we should move the arch_sync_dma_for_{device,cpu}
> > calls from xen_dma_sync_for_{device,cpu} into the callers, as they
> > are provided by the generic dma-noncoherent.h and optimized out for
> > coherent architectures like x86.  Then the swiotlb-xen.c code only
> > need to call dma_cache_maint as the interface (which would have to
> > grow a better name), which should then only need a single kind of
> > address.
> 
> ... actually I'd keep the xen_dma_sync_for_{device,cpu} names for the
> low-level interface, just move the arch_sync_dma_for_{device,cpu}
> calls up.

I can do that.