On Thu, Apr 08, 2021 at 03:02:30PM +0100, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 08, 2021 at 02:59:26PM +0100, Will Deacon wrote:
> > > -static void __arm_lpae_sync_pte(arm_lpae_iopte *ptep,
> > > +static void __arm_lpae_sync_pte(arm_lpae_iopte *ptep, int num_entries,
> > > struct io_pgtable_cfg *cfg)
> > > {
> > > dma_sync_single_for_device(cfg->iommu_dev, __arm_lpae_dma_addr(ptep),
> > > - sizeof(*ptep), DMA_TO_DEVICE);
> > > + sizeof(*ptep) * num_entries, DMA_TO_DEVICE);
> > > }
> >
> > Have you tested this with CONFIG_DMA_API_DEBUG=y? I _think_ it should be
> > ok as long as we don't attempt to sync across a page boundary, but it would
> > be good to give it a spin just to check.
>
> syncing over a page boundary is perfectly fine. It just needs to say in
> the bounds of the original mapping.
Yes, you're right. I got the CPU page size mixed up with the IOMMU page
size, so I think we're good as the allocations here are made at IOMMU
page size granularity.
Will
_______________________________________________
iommu mailing list
iommu@lists.linux-foundation.org
https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/iommu
