| Message ID | 20180625064453.19768-2-kraxel@redhat.com (mailing list archive) |
|---|---|
| State | New, archived |
| Headers | show |
On Mon, 25 Jun 2018 08:44:52 +0200 Gerd Hoffmann <kraxel@redhat.com> wrote: > There is no default implementation for dma_buf_ops->unmap. > So add a function unmapping the page, otherwise we'll leak them. > > Signed-off-by: Gerd Hoffmann <kraxel@redhat.com> > --- > samples/vfio-mdev/mbochs.c | 7 +++++++ > 1 file changed, 7 insertions(+) > > diff --git a/samples/vfio-mdev/mbochs.c b/samples/vfio-mdev/mbochs.c > index aa25cda21d..85ac603769 100644 > --- a/samples/vfio-mdev/mbochs.c > +++ b/samples/vfio-mdev/mbochs.c > @@ -811,11 +811,18 @@ static void *mbochs_kmap_dmabuf(struct dma_buf *buf, unsigned long page_num) > return kmap(page); > } > > +static void mbochs_kunmap_dmabuf(struct dma_buf *buf, unsigned long page_num, > + void *vaddr) > +{ > + kunmap(vaddr); > +} > + > static struct dma_buf_ops mbochs_dmabuf_ops = { > .map_dma_buf = mbochs_map_dmabuf, > .unmap_dma_buf = mbochs_unmap_dmabuf, > .release = mbochs_release_dmabuf, > .map = mbochs_kmap_dmabuf, > + .unmap = mbochs_kunmap_dmabuf, > .mmap = mbochs_mmap_dmabuf, > }; > Is this a fix for v4.18? AFAICT, the kmap_atomic removal is only in next, not yet upstream and hopefully includes this sample driver before hitting mainline. Should we therefore have a v4.18-rc based patch for this to include before v4.18 to resolve this? Thanks, Alex
> > .map = mbochs_kmap_dmabuf, > > + .unmap = mbochs_kunmap_dmabuf, > > .mmap = mbochs_mmap_dmabuf, > > }; > > > > Is this a fix for v4.18? Yes. > AFAICT, the kmap_atomic removal is only in > next, not yet upstream and hopefully includes this sample driver before > hitting mainline. Should we therefore have a v4.18-rc based patch for > this to include before v4.18 to resolve this? The kmap_atomic interface will be removed in 4.19 because nobody uses it, so dropping the mbochs implementation already in 4.18 should not cause any issues. So just queue both for 4.18 would be the easiest way do deal with the dependency I think. cheers, Gerd
On Tue, 26 Jun 2018 09:32:33 +0200 Gerd Hoffmann <kraxel@redhat.com> wrote: > > > .map = mbochs_kmap_dmabuf, > > > + .unmap = mbochs_kunmap_dmabuf, > > > .mmap = mbochs_mmap_dmabuf, > > > }; > > > > > > > Is this a fix for v4.18? > > Yes. > > > AFAICT, the kmap_atomic removal is only in > > next, not yet upstream and hopefully includes this sample driver before > > hitting mainline. Should we therefore have a v4.18-rc based patch for > > this to include before v4.18 to resolve this? > > The kmap_atomic interface will be removed in 4.19 because nobody uses > it, so dropping the mbochs implementation already in 4.18 should not > cause any issues. > > So just queue both for 4.18 would be the easiest way do deal with the > dependency I think. Ok, so I'll drop the fixes tag and apply both to my for-linus branch for v4.18 and then Christian won't need to include it for the v4.19 patch. Thanks, Alex
diff --git a/samples/vfio-mdev/mbochs.c b/samples/vfio-mdev/mbochs.c index aa25cda21d..85ac603769 100644 --- a/samples/vfio-mdev/mbochs.c +++ b/samples/vfio-mdev/mbochs.c @@ -811,11 +811,18 @@ static void *mbochs_kmap_dmabuf(struct dma_buf *buf, unsigned long page_num) return kmap(page); } +static void mbochs_kunmap_dmabuf(struct dma_buf *buf, unsigned long page_num, + void *vaddr) +{ + kunmap(vaddr); +} + static struct dma_buf_ops mbochs_dmabuf_ops = { .map_dma_buf = mbochs_map_dmabuf, .unmap_dma_buf = mbochs_unmap_dmabuf, .release = mbochs_release_dmabuf, .map = mbochs_kmap_dmabuf, + .unmap = mbochs_kunmap_dmabuf, .mmap = mbochs_mmap_dmabuf, };
There is no default implementation for dma_buf_ops->unmap. So add a function unmapping the page, otherwise we'll leak them. Signed-off-by: Gerd Hoffmann <kraxel@redhat.com> --- samples/vfio-mdev/mbochs.c | 7 +++++++ 1 file changed, 7 insertions(+)