lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2022]   [Dec]   [16]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
From
Date
SubjectRe: [PATCH v3 0/2] media: uvcvideo: Code cleanup for dev->status
Hi Alan

On Thu, 15 Dec 2022 at 16:34, Alan Stern <stern@rowland.harvard.edu> wrote:
>
> On Thu, Dec 15, 2022 at 11:57:17AM +0100, Ricardo Ribalda wrote:
> > There is no need to make a kzalloc just for 16 bytes. Let's embed the data
> > into the main data structure.
> >
> > Now that we are at it, lets remove all the castings and open coding of
> > offsets for it.
> >
> > [Christoph, do you think dma wise we are violating any non written rules? :) thanks]
>
> There _is_ a rule, and it is not exactly unwritten. The kerneldoc for
> the transfer_buffer member of struct urb says:
>
> This buffer must be suitable for DMA; allocate it with
> kmalloc() or equivalent.
>
> Which in general means that the buffer must not be part of a larger
> structure -- not unless the driver can guarantee that the structure will
> _never_ be accessed while a USB transfer to/from the buffer is taking
> place.
>

Thanks a lot for the clarification. I was mainly looking at the kerneldoc from:
https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/tree/include/linux/usb.h#n1687

and I could not see any reference to the DMA requirements.

Mind if I send a patch to add a reference there?


> There are examples all over the USB subsystem where buffers as small as
> one or two bytes get kmalloc'ed in order to obey this rule. 16 bytes is
> certainly big enough that you shouldn't worry about it being allocated
> separately.
>
Yep, we should keep it malloced. Thanks a lot for looking into this :)


> Alan Stern



--
Ricardo Ribalda

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2022-12-16 09:55    [W:0.111 / U:0.108 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site