mirror of https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Balbir Singh <balbirs@nvidia.com>
To: Nicolin Chen <nicolinc@nvidia.com>
Cc: jgg@nvidia.com, will@kernel.org, robin.murphy@arm.com,
	joro@8bytes.org, jean-philippe@linaro.org,
	miko.lenczewski@arm.com, peterz@infradead.org,
	smostafa@google.com, kevin.tian@intel.com, praan@google.com,
	linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, iommu@lists.linux.dev,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, patches@lists.linux.dev
Subject: Re: [PATCH rfcv2 1/8] iommu/arm-smmu-v3: Clear cmds->num after arm_smmu_cmdq_batch_submit
Date: Wed, 10 Sep 2025 08:49:52 +1000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <9d463bc4-78e0-43f3-ae69-2746ab72e318@nvidia.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <aL++Qv8bNvL5qjL8@nvidia.com>

On 9/9/25 15:42, Nicolin Chen wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 09, 2025 at 01:16:11PM +1000, Balbir Singh wrote:
>> On 9/9/25 09:26, Nicolin Chen wrote:
>>> None of the callers of arm_smmu_cmdq_batch_submit() cares about the batch
>>> after a submission. So, it'll be certainly safe to nuke the cmds->num, at
>>> least upon a successful one. This will ease a bit a wrapper function, for
>>> the new arm_smmu_invs structure.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Nicolin Chen <nicolinc@nvidia.com>
>>> ---
>>>  drivers/iommu/arm/arm-smmu-v3/arm-smmu-v3.c | 10 ++++++++--
>>>  1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/drivers/iommu/arm/arm-smmu-v3/arm-smmu-v3.c b/drivers/iommu/arm/arm-smmu-v3/arm-smmu-v3.c
>>> index 2a8b46b948f05..cccf8f52ee0d5 100644
>>> --- a/drivers/iommu/arm/arm-smmu-v3/arm-smmu-v3.c
>>> +++ b/drivers/iommu/arm/arm-smmu-v3/arm-smmu-v3.c
>>> @@ -974,11 +974,17 @@ static void arm_smmu_cmdq_batch_add(struct arm_smmu_device *smmu,
>>>  	cmds->num++;
>>>  }
>>>  
>>> +/* Clears cmds->num after a successful submission */
>>>  static int arm_smmu_cmdq_batch_submit(struct arm_smmu_device *smmu,
>>>  				      struct arm_smmu_cmdq_batch *cmds)
>>>  {
>>
>> Nit: arm_smmu_cmdq_batch_submit_clear()?
> 
> Probably not. There is no particular point in highlighting it in
> the function name, as there is no use case wanting an uncleared
> version.

I did not suggest we need an uncleared version, I suggested the change
in name to highlight that the function has a side-effect of clearing
the cmds->num

Thanks,
Balbir

  reply	other threads:[~2025-09-09 22:50 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 35+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2025-09-08 23:26 [PATCH rfcv2 0/8] iommu/arm-smmu-v3: Introduce an RCU-protected invalidation array Nicolin Chen
2025-09-08 23:26 ` [PATCH rfcv2 1/8] iommu/arm-smmu-v3: Clear cmds->num after arm_smmu_cmdq_batch_submit Nicolin Chen
2025-09-09  3:16   ` Balbir Singh
2025-09-09  5:42     ` Nicolin Chen
2025-09-09 22:49       ` Balbir Singh [this message]
2025-09-10  2:03         ` Nicolin Chen
2025-09-10  2:56   ` Nicolin Chen
2025-09-08 23:26 ` [PATCH rfcv2 2/8] iommu/arm-smmu-v3: Explicitly set smmu_domain->stage for SVA Nicolin Chen
2025-09-09  3:25   ` Balbir Singh
2025-09-09 22:31   ` Balbir Singh
2025-09-10  2:06     ` Nicolin Chen
2025-09-24 21:07   ` Jason Gunthorpe
2025-09-08 23:26 ` [PATCH rfcv2 3/8] iommu/arm-smmu-v3: Add an inline arm_smmu_domain_free() Nicolin Chen
2025-09-24 21:08   ` Jason Gunthorpe
2025-09-08 23:26 ` [PATCH rfcv2 4/8] iommu/arm-smmu-v3: Introduce a per-domain arm_smmu_invs array Nicolin Chen
2025-09-09 13:01   ` kernel test robot
2025-09-20  0:26   ` Nicolin Chen
2025-09-24 21:29   ` Jason Gunthorpe
2025-09-29 18:52     ` Nicolin Chen
2025-09-30 12:13       ` Jason Gunthorpe
2025-09-08 23:26 ` [PATCH rfcv2 5/8] iommu/arm-smmu-v3: Pre-allocate a per-master invalidation array Nicolin Chen
2025-09-24 21:32   ` Jason Gunthorpe
2025-09-29 19:11     ` Nicolin Chen
2025-09-30 11:55       ` Jason Gunthorpe
2025-09-08 23:27 ` [PATCH rfcv2 6/8] iommu/arm-smmu-v3: Populate smmu_domain->invs when attaching masters Nicolin Chen
2025-09-24 21:42   ` Jason Gunthorpe
2025-09-29 20:52     ` Nicolin Chen
2025-09-30 12:12       ` Jason Gunthorpe
2025-09-30 20:19         ` Nicolin Chen
2025-10-01 16:25           ` Jason Gunthorpe
2025-10-01 17:16             ` Nicolin Chen
2025-09-08 23:27 ` [PATCH rfcv2 7/8] iommu/arm-smmu-v3: Add arm_smmu_invs based arm_smmu_domain_inv_range() Nicolin Chen
2025-09-24 21:56   ` Jason Gunthorpe
2025-09-29 21:00     ` Nicolin Chen
2025-09-08 23:27 ` [PATCH rfcv2 8/8] iommu/arm-smmu-v3: Perform per-domain invalidations using arm_smmu_invs Nicolin Chen

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=9d463bc4-78e0-43f3-ae69-2746ab72e318@nvidia.com \
    --to=balbirs@nvidia.com \
    --cc=iommu@lists.linux.dev \
    --cc=jean-philippe@linaro.org \
    --cc=jgg@nvidia.com \
    --cc=joro@8bytes.org \
    --cc=kevin.tian@intel.com \
    --cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=miko.lenczewski@arm.com \
    --cc=nicolinc@nvidia.com \
    --cc=patches@lists.linux.dev \
    --cc=peterz@infradead.org \
    --cc=praan@google.com \
    --cc=robin.murphy@arm.com \
    --cc=smostafa@google.com \
    --cc=will@kernel.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox

all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®