[PATCH resend] staging: gasket: don't release coherent mappings

[PATCH resend] staging: gasket: don't release coherent mappings

[Todd Poynor]

From: Todd Poynor <toddpoynor@google.com>

coherent address mappings aren't backed by a struct page, don't need to
be released, and don't count as an active page in the page table
bookkeeping.

Signed-off-by: Simon Que <sque@chromium.org>
Signed-off-by: Todd Poynor <toddpoynor@google.com>
---
 drivers/staging/gasket/gasket_page_table.c | 2 +-
 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/drivers/staging/gasket/gasket_page_table.c b/drivers/staging/gasket/gasket_page_table.c
index dcd52e141f95..e71baa11c8de 100644
--- a/drivers/staging/gasket/gasket_page_table.c
+++ b/drivers/staging/gasket/gasket_page_table.c
@@ -1233,7 +1233,7 @@ static void gasket_perform_unmapping(
 				dma_unmap_page(pg_tbl->device, ptes[i].dma_addr,
 					       PAGE_SIZE, DMA_FROM_DEVICE);
 			}
-			if (gasket_release_page(ptes[i].page))
+			if (ptes[i].page && gasket_release_page(ptes[i].page))
 				--pg_tbl->num_active_pages;
 		}
 		ptes[i].status = PTE_FREE;
-- 
2.18.0.203.gfac676dfb9-goog

Resending, extracted from the previous stack of patches that needs
other cleanups.

Re: [PATCH resend] staging: gasket: don't release coherent mappings

[Greg Kroah-Hartman]

On Sun, Jul 15, 2018 at 11:24:41AM -0700, Todd Poynor wrote:
> From: Todd Poynor <toddpoynor@google.com>
> 
> coherent address mappings aren't backed by a struct page, don't need to
> be released, and don't count as an active page in the page table
> bookkeeping.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Simon Que <sque@chromium.org>
> Signed-off-by: Todd Poynor <toddpoynor@google.com>
> ---
>  drivers/staging/gasket/gasket_page_table.c | 2 +-
>  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)

Hi,

This is the friendly patch-bot of Greg Kroah-Hartman.  You have sent him
a patch that has triggered this response.  He used to manually respond
to these common problems, but in order to save his sanity (he kept
writing the same thing over and over, yet to different people), I was
created.  Hopefully you will not take offence and will fix the problem
in your patch and resubmit it so that it can be accepted into the Linux
kernel tree.

You are receiving this message because of the following common error(s)
as indicated below:

- You sent multiple patches, yet no indication of which ones should be
  applied in which order.  Greg could just guess, but if you are
  receiving this email, he guessed wrong and the patches didn't apply.
  Please read the section entitled "The canonical patch format" in the
  kernel file, Documentation/SubmittingPatches for a description of how
  to do this so that Greg has a chance to apply these correctly.

If you wish to discuss this problem further, or you have questions about
how to resolve this issue, please feel free to respond to this email and
Greg will reply once he has dug out from the pending patches received
from other developers.

thanks,

greg k-h's patch email bot