Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::1:20 as permitted sender) client-ip=2620:137:e000::1:20;
Date:   Thu, 15 Dec 2022 11:11:40 +0200
From:   Laurent Pinchart <laurent.pinchart@ideasonboard.com>
To:     Ricardo Ribalda <ribalda@chromium.org>
Cc:     Sergey Senozhatsky <senozhatsky@chromium.org>,
        Yunke Cao <yunkec@chromium.org>,
        Ming Lei <tom.leiming@gmail.com>,
        Jonathan Cameron <Jonathan.Cameron@huawei.com>,
        Mauro Carvalho Chehab <mchehab@kernel.org>,
        Max Staudt <mstaudt@google.com>, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
        linux-media@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] media: uvcvideo: Do not alloc dev->status
Message-ID: <Y5rkzAESkLt/u6kP@pendragon.ideasonboard.com>
References: <20221214-uvc-status-alloc-v2-0-3f1cba6fc734@chromium.org>
 <Y5p1DVWXuYSzkRO4@google.com>
 <CANiDSCtQFR-CPNXu-hqM_11DogMTvdhK9xWy7cZyd7vwZAMBSQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <Y5rj9GhQuyNbNnDw@pendragon.ideasonboard.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <Y5rj9GhQuyNbNnDw@pendragon.ideasonboard.com>
Precedence: bulk

Hi Ricardo,

On Thu, Dec 15, 2022 at 11:08:05AM +0200, Laurent Pinchart wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 15, 2022 at 08:59:14AM +0100, Ricardo Ribalda wrote:
> > On Thu, 15 Dec 2022 at 02:15, Sergey Senozhatsky wrote:
> > >
> > > On (22/12/14 14:37), Ricardo Ribalda wrote:
> > > [..]
> > > > +struct uvc_status_streaming {
> > > > +     u8      button;
> > > > +} __packed;
> > > > +
> > > > +struct uvc_status_control {
> > > > +     u8      bSelector;
> > > > +     u8      bAttribute;
> > > > +     u8      bValue[11];
> > > > +} __packed;
> > > > +
> > > > +struct uvc_status {
> > > > +     u8      bStatusType;
> > > > +     u8      bOriginator;
> > > > +     u8      bEvent;
> > > > +     union {
> > > > +             struct uvc_status_control control;
> > > > +             struct uvc_status_streaming streaming;
> > > > +     };
> > > > +} __packed;
> > > > +
> > > >  struct uvc_device {
> > > >       struct usb_device *udev;
> > > >       struct usb_interface *intf;
> > > > @@ -559,7 +579,7 @@ struct uvc_device {
> > > >       /* Status Interrupt Endpoint */
> > > >       struct usb_host_endpoint *int_ep;
> > > >       struct urb *int_urb;
> > > > -     u8 *status;
> > > > +
> > > >       struct input_dev *input;
> > > >       char input_phys[64];
> > > >
> > > > @@ -572,6 +592,12 @@ struct uvc_device {
> > > >       } async_ctrl;
> > > >
> > > >       struct uvc_entity *gpio_unit;
> > > > +
> > > > +     /*
> > > > +      * Ensure that status is aligned, making it safe to use with
> > > > +      * non-coherent DMA.
> > > > +      */
> > > > +     struct uvc_status status __aligned(ARCH_KMALLOC_MINALIGN);
> > >
> > >         ____cacheline_aligned ?
> > >
> > > I don't see anyone using ARCH_KMALLOC_MINALIGN except for slab.h
> > 
> > Seems like cacheline is not good enough:
> > 
> > https://github.com/torvalds/linux/commit/12c4efe3509b8018e76ea3ebda8227cb53bf5887
> > https://lore.kernel.org/all/20220405135758.774016-1-catalin.marinas@arm.com/
> > 
> > and ARCH_KMALLOC_MINALIGN is what we have today and is working...
> > 
> > But yeah, the name for that define is not the nicest :)
> > 
> > I added Jonathan Cameron, on cc, as he had to deal with something
> > similar for iio in case we are missing something
> 
> I'd like to get feedback on this from DMA and USB experts. Expanding the
> CC list of the original patch would help (especially including the
> linux-usb mailing list).

Also, do we need the allocation change ? It doesn't seem to simplify the
code that much, neither in terms of lines of code

>  2 files changed, 48 insertions(+), 49 deletions(-)

nor in terms of complexity. Maybe we could keep the union and offsetof
changes, and drop the allocation change ? In any case, those are two
different changes, so I'd split them in two patches at least.

> > ps: and I thought this was an easy change :P

-- 
Regards,

Laurent Pinchart