On Thu, Jun 04, 2026 at 02:09:53PM +0530, Aneesh Kumar K.V (Arm) wrote:
> @@ -270,9 +270,12 @@ void *dma_direct_alloc(struct device *dev, size_t size,
> * the atomic pools instead if we aren't allowed block.
> */
> if ((remap || (attrs & DMA_ATTR_CC_SHARED)) &&
> - dma_direct_use_pool(dev, gfp))
> - return dma_direct_alloc_from_pool(dev, size, dma_handle,
> - gfp, attrs);
> + dma_direct_use_pool(dev, gfp)) {
> + page = dma_direct_alloc_from_pool(dev, size,
> + dma_handle, &cpu_addr,
> + gfp, attrs);
> + return page ? cpu_addr : NULL;
> + }
You should probably put this at the start of the series so it can be
backported
Reviewed-by: Jason Gunthorpe <[email protected]>
To Petr's question I think this just shows nobody is really stressing
the PCI dma paths on CC VMs today.
if (force_dma_unencrypted(dev) && dma_direct_use_pool(dev, gfp))
return dma_direct_alloc_from_pool(dev, size, dma_handle, gfp);
For instance the places even calling dma_alloc_pages() don't look like
things people would use in a CC VM.
Jason
