Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::1:18 as permitted sender) client-ip=2620:137:e000::1:18;
Date:   Wed, 18 May 2022 15:13:53 +0200
From:   Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>
To:     Robin Murphy <robin.murphy@arm.com>
Cc:     John Garry <john.garry@huawei.com>, joro@8bytes.org,
        will@kernel.org, hch@lst.de, m.szyprowski@samsung.com,
        chenxiang66@hisilicon.com, thunder.leizhen@huawei.com,
        iommu@lists.linux-foundation.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
        liyihang6@hisilicon.com
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH] dma-iommu: Add iommu_dma_max_mapping_size()
Message-ID: <20220518131353.GB26019@lst.de>
References: <1652706361-92557-1-git-send-email-john.garry@huawei.com> <f5b78c9c-312e-70ab-ecbb-f14623a4b6e3@arm.com> <9160031b-50be-6993-5a8e-f238391962c5@huawei.com> <8f193bdd-3a0a-f9ed-0726-e6081f374320@arm.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <8f193bdd-3a0a-f9ed-0726-e6081f374320@arm.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.17 (2007-11-01)
Precedence: bulk

On Tue, May 17, 2022 at 01:02:00PM +0100, Robin Murphy wrote:
>> So how to inform the SCSI driver of this caching limit then so that it may 
>> limit the SGL length?
>
> Driver-specific mechanism; block-layer-specific mechanism; redefine this 
> whole API to something like dma_opt_mapping_size(), as a limit above which 
> mappings might become less efficient or start to fail (callback to my 
> thoughts on [1] as well, I suppose); many options. Just not imposing a 
> ridiculously low *maximum* on everyone wherein mapping calls "should not be 
> larger than the returned value" when that's clearly bollocks.

Well, for swiotlb it is a hard limit.  So if we want to go down that
route we need two APIs, one for the optimal size and one for the
hard limit.