Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1756722AbZDGPdy (ORCPT ); Tue, 7 Apr 2009 11:33:54 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1753298AbZDGPdo (ORCPT ); Tue, 7 Apr 2009 11:33:44 -0400 Received: from gate.crashing.org ([63.228.1.57]:37716 "EHLO gate.crashing.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753293AbZDGPdn (ORCPT ); Tue, 7 Apr 2009 11:33:43 -0400 Cc: beckyb@kernel.crashing.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, mingo@elte.hu, jeremy@goop.org, ian.campbell@citrix.com Message-Id: <9C76D5F2-5D3C-4499-B358-129428FA6F33@kernel.crashing.org> From: Kumar Gala To: FUJITA Tomonori In-Reply-To: <20090407180928Y.fujita.tomonori@lab.ntt.co.jp> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed; delsp=yes Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v930.3) Subject: Re: [PATCH 5/7] swiotlb: (re)Create swiotlb_unmap_single Date: Tue, 7 Apr 2009 10:32:20 -0500 References: <1238810209-24499-6-git-send-email-beckyb@kernel.crashing.org> <20090407112247W.fujita.tomonori@lab.ntt.co.jp> <20090407180928Y.fujita.tomonori@lab.ntt.co.jp> X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.930.3) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 2298 Lines: 61 On Apr 7, 2009, at 4:09 AM, FUJITA Tomonori wrote: > On Tue, 7 Apr 2009 01:34:44 -0500 > Kumar Gala wrote: > >> >> On Apr 6, 2009, at 9:24 PM, FUJITA Tomonori wrote: >> >>> On Fri, 3 Apr 2009 20:56:47 -0500 >>> Becky Bruce wrote: >>> >>>> This mirrors the current swiotlb_sync_single() setup >>>> where the swiotlb_unmap_single() function is static to this >>>> file and contains the logic required to determine if we need >>>> to call actual sync_single. Previously, swiotlb_unmap_page >>>> and swiotlb_unmap_sg were duplicating very similar code. >>>> The duplicated code has also been reformatted for >>>> readability. >>>> >>>> Note that the swiotlb_unmap_sg code was previously doing >>>> a complicated comparison to determine if an addresses needed >>>> to be unmapped where a simple is_swiotlb_buffer() call >>>> would have sufficed. >>>> >>>> Signed-off-by: Becky Bruce >>>> --- >>>> lib/swiotlb.c | 36 +++++++++++++++++++++++------------- >>>> 1 files changed, 23 insertions(+), 13 deletions(-) >>>> >>>> diff --git a/lib/swiotlb.c b/lib/swiotlb.c >>>> index af2ec25..602315b 100644 >>>> --- a/lib/swiotlb.c >>>> +++ b/lib/swiotlb.c >>> >>> I don't think 'swiotlb_unmap_single' name is appropriate. >>> >>> swiotlb_unmap_single sounds like an exported function that IOMMUs >>> can >>> use (and it was) however it should not be. >> >> What do you suggest we call it? __swiotlb_unmap_single. > > I think that __swiotlb_unmap_single is better because the name implies > that it's an internal function. It's fine by me. > > If it is odd that __swiotlb_unmap_single() is just a wrapper function > of unmap_single(), which does the real job to unmap a dma mapping, it > might be another possible option to rename unmap_single to > do_unamp_single and use unmap_single. I think you lost me here. I'd prefer to just use __swiotlb_unmap_single at this point and get this code into the tree and work on such renaming after the fact (if that's ok). - k -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/