lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2016]   [May]   [17]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
SubjectRe: [PATCH v7 2/3] SMAF: add CMA allocator
From
Hi Emil,

2016-05-17 1:05 GMT+02:00 Emil Velikov <emil.l.velikov@gmail.com>:
> Hi Benjamin,
>
> On 9 May 2016 at 16:07, Benjamin Gaignard <benjamin.gaignard@linaro.org> wrote:
>> SMAF CMA allocator implement helpers functions to allow SMAF
>> to allocate contiguous memory.
>>
>> match() each if at least one of the attached devices have coherent_dma_mask
>> set to DMA_BIT_MASK(32).
>>
> What is the idea behind the hardcoded 32. Wouldn't it be better to avoid that ?
>

Device dma_bit_mask field has to be set to DMA_BIT_MASK(32) to target
a CMA area.
I haven't see any other #define for that.

>
>> +static void smaf_cma_release(struct dma_buf *dmabuf)
>> +{
>> + struct smaf_cma_buffer_info *info = dmabuf->priv;
>> + DEFINE_DMA_ATTRS(attrs);
>> +
>> + dma_set_attr(DMA_ATTR_WRITE_COMBINE, &attrs);
>> +
> Imho it's worth storing the dma_attrs within smaf_cma_buffer_info.
> This way it's less likely for things to go wrong, if one forgets to
> update one of the three in the future.

Here I have duplicate what is done everywhere else but I could try to
add it into
smaf_cma_buffer_info structure.

>
>> +static void smaf_cma_unmap(struct dma_buf_attachment *attachment,
>> + struct sg_table *sgt,
>> + enum dma_data_direction direction)
>> +{
>> + /* do nothing */
> There could/should really be a comment explaining why we "do nothing"
> here, right ?
>

I haven't used DMA_ATTR_NO_KERNEL_MAPPING while allocating the buffer
so kernel mapping is set by default and I don't have to manage map refcounting.

>> +}
>> +
>> +static int smaf_cma_mmap(struct dma_buf *dmabuf, struct vm_area_struct *vma)
>> +{
>> + struct smaf_cma_buffer_info *info = dmabuf->priv;
>> + int ret;
>> + DEFINE_DMA_ATTRS(attrs);
>> +
>> + dma_set_attr(DMA_ATTR_WRITE_COMBINE, &attrs);
>> +
>> + if (info->size < vma->vm_end - vma->vm_start)
>> + return -EINVAL;
>> +
>> + vma->vm_flags |= VM_IO | VM_PFNMAP | VM_DONTEXPAND | VM_DONTDUMP;
>> + ret = dma_mmap_attrs(info->dev, vma, info->vaddr, info->paddr,
>> + info->size, &attrs);
>> +
>> + return ret;
> Kill the temporary variable 'ret' ?

sure
>
>
>> +static struct dma_buf_ops smaf_cma_ops = {
> const ? Afaict the compiler would/should warn you about discarding it
> as the ops are defined const.
>
>
>> +static struct dma_buf *smaf_cma_allocate(struct dma_buf *dmabuf,
>> + size_t length, unsigned int flags)
>> +{
>> + struct dma_buf_attachment *attach_obj;
>> + struct smaf_cma_buffer_info *info;
>> + struct dma_buf *cma_dmabuf;
>> + int ret;
>> +
>> + DEFINE_DMA_BUF_EXPORT_INFO(export);
>> + DEFINE_DMA_ATTRS(attrs);
>> +
>> + dma_set_attr(DMA_ATTR_WRITE_COMBINE, &attrs);
>> +
>> + info = kzalloc(sizeof(*info), GFP_KERNEL);
>> + if (!info)
>> + return NULL;
>> +
>> + info->dev = find_matching_device(dmabuf);
> find_matching_device() can return NULL. We should handle that imho.
>

If the returned device have an associated CMA area then it will use it else
if dev have not CMA area or if find_matching_device() return NULL
the default CMA area will be used

>> + info->size = length;
>> + info->vaddr = dma_alloc_attrs(info->dev, info->size, &info->paddr,
>> + GFP_KERNEL | __GFP_NOWARN, &attrs);
>> + if (!info->vaddr) {
>> + ret = -ENOMEM;
> set-but-unused-variable 'ret' ?
>
I will remove it

>> + goto error;
>> + }
>> +
>> + export.ops = &smaf_cma_ops;
>> + export.size = info->size;
>> + export.flags = flags;
>> + export.priv = info;
>> +
>> + cma_dmabuf = dma_buf_export(&export);
>> + if (IS_ERR(cma_dmabuf))
> Missing dma_free_attrs() ? I'd add another label in the error path and
> handle it there.
>
OK

>> + goto error;
>> +
>> + list_for_each_entry(attach_obj, &dmabuf->attachments, node) {
>> + dma_buf_attach(cma_dmabuf, attach_obj->dev);
> Imho one should error out if attach fails. Or warn at the very least ?
>
>
>> +static int __init smaf_cma_init(void)
>> +{
>> + INIT_LIST_HEAD(&smaf_cma.list_node);
> Isn't this something that smaf_register_allocator() should be doing ?
>

Yes for sure

>
> Regards,
> Emil



--
Benjamin Gaignard

Graphic Working Group

Linaro.org │ Open source software for ARM SoCs

Follow Linaro: Facebook | Twitter | Blog

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2016-05-17 17:21    [W:0.436 / U:0.040 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site