[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] [PATCH v2 2/3] arm64: do not set SWIOTLB_NO_FORCE when swiotlb is required
From: Christoph Hellwig <hch@xxxxxx> Although SWIOTLB_NO_FORCE is meant to allow later calls to swiotlb_init, today dma_direct_map_page returns error if SWIOTLB_NO_FORCE. For now, without a larger overhaul of SWIOTLB_NO_FORCE, the best we can do is to avoid setting SWIOTLB_NO_FORCE in mem_init when we know that it is going to be required later (e.g. Xen requires it). CC: boris.ostrovsky@xxxxxxxxxx CC: jgross@xxxxxxxx CC: catalin.marinas@xxxxxxx CC: will@xxxxxxxxxx CC: linux-arm-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Fixes: 2726bf3ff252 ("swiotlb: Make SWIOTLB_NO_FORCE perform no allocation") Signed-off-by: Christoph Hellwig <hch@xxxxxx> Signed-off-by: Stefano Stabellini <stefano.stabellini@xxxxxxxxxx> --- Changes in v2: - patch split --- arch/arm64/mm/init.c | 3 ++- 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/arch/arm64/mm/init.c b/arch/arm64/mm/init.c index 16a2b2b1c54d..e55409caaee3 100644 --- a/arch/arm64/mm/init.c +++ b/arch/arm64/mm/init.c @@ -43,6 +43,7 @@ #include <linux/sizes.h> #include <asm/tlb.h> #include <asm/alternative.h> +#include <asm/xen/swiotlb-xen.h> /* * We need to be able to catch inadvertent references to memstart_addr @@ -482,7 +483,7 @@ void __init mem_init(void) if (swiotlb_force == SWIOTLB_FORCE || max_pfn > PFN_DOWN(arm64_dma_phys_limit)) swiotlb_init(1); - else + else if (!xen_swiotlb_detect()) swiotlb_force = SWIOTLB_NO_FORCE; set_max_mapnr(max_pfn - PHYS_PFN_OFFSET); -- 2.17.1
|
Lists.xenproject.org is hosted with RackSpace, monitoring our |