| Message ID | 1567413598-4477-1-git-send-email-jrdr.linux@gmail.com (mailing list archive) |
|---|---|
| State | Accepted |
| Commit | e6fa0dc86734f99b037b36b8682133efc2b6e16b |
| Headers | show |
| Series | [v2] swiotlb-xen: Convert to use macro | expand |
On Mon, Sep 2, 2019 at 2:04 PM Souptick Joarder <jrdr.linux@gmail.com> wrote: > > Rather than using static int max_dma_bits, this > can be coverted to use as macro. > > Signed-off-by: Souptick Joarder <jrdr.linux@gmail.com> > Reviewed-by: Juergen Gross <jgross@suse.com> If it is still not late, can we get this patch in queue for 5.4 ? > --- > drivers/xen/swiotlb-xen.c | 5 ++--- > 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/drivers/xen/swiotlb-xen.c b/drivers/xen/swiotlb-xen.c > index ae1df49..d1eced5 100644 > --- a/drivers/xen/swiotlb-xen.c > +++ b/drivers/xen/swiotlb-xen.c > @@ -38,6 +38,7 @@ > #include <asm/xen/page-coherent.h> > > #include <trace/events/swiotlb.h> > +#define MAX_DMA_BITS 32 > /* > * Used to do a quick range check in swiotlb_tbl_unmap_single and > * swiotlb_tbl_sync_single_*, to see if the memory was in fact allocated by this > @@ -114,8 +115,6 @@ static int is_xen_swiotlb_buffer(dma_addr_t dma_addr) > return 0; > } > > -static int max_dma_bits = 32; > - > static int > xen_swiotlb_fixup(void *buf, size_t size, unsigned long nslabs) > { > @@ -135,7 +134,7 @@ static int is_xen_swiotlb_buffer(dma_addr_t dma_addr) > p + (i << IO_TLB_SHIFT), > get_order(slabs << IO_TLB_SHIFT), > dma_bits, &dma_handle); > - } while (rc && dma_bits++ < max_dma_bits); > + } while (rc && dma_bits++ < MAX_DMA_BITS); > if (rc) > return rc; > > -- > 1.9.1 >
On 9/6/19 8:27 AM, Souptick Joarder wrote: > On Mon, Sep 2, 2019 at 2:04 PM Souptick Joarder <jrdr.linux@gmail.com> wrote: >> Rather than using static int max_dma_bits, this >> can be coverted to use as macro. >> >> Signed-off-by: Souptick Joarder <jrdr.linux@gmail.com> >> Reviewed-by: Juergen Gross <jgross@suse.com> > If it is still not late, can we get this patch in queue for 5.4 ? Yes, I will queue it later today. -boris
On Fri, Sep 6, 2019 at 7:02 PM Boris Ostrovsky <boris.ostrovsky@oracle.com> wrote: > > On 9/6/19 8:27 AM, Souptick Joarder wrote: > > On Mon, Sep 2, 2019 at 2:04 PM Souptick Joarder <jrdr.linux@gmail.com> wrote: > >> Rather than using static int max_dma_bits, this > >> can be coverted to use as macro. > >> > >> Signed-off-by: Souptick Joarder <jrdr.linux@gmail.com> > >> Reviewed-by: Juergen Gross <jgross@suse.com> > > If it is still not late, can we get this patch in queue for 5.4 ? > > > Yes, I will queue it later today. Thanks Boris.
diff --git a/drivers/xen/swiotlb-xen.c b/drivers/xen/swiotlb-xen.c index ae1df49..d1eced5 100644 --- a/drivers/xen/swiotlb-xen.c +++ b/drivers/xen/swiotlb-xen.c @@ -38,6 +38,7 @@ #include <asm/xen/page-coherent.h> #include <trace/events/swiotlb.h> +#define MAX_DMA_BITS 32 /* * Used to do a quick range check in swiotlb_tbl_unmap_single and * swiotlb_tbl_sync_single_*, to see if the memory was in fact allocated by this @@ -114,8 +115,6 @@ static int is_xen_swiotlb_buffer(dma_addr_t dma_addr) return 0; } -static int max_dma_bits = 32; - static int xen_swiotlb_fixup(void *buf, size_t size, unsigned long nslabs) { @@ -135,7 +134,7 @@ static int is_xen_swiotlb_buffer(dma_addr_t dma_addr) p + (i << IO_TLB_SHIFT), get_order(slabs << IO_TLB_SHIFT), dma_bits, &dma_handle); - } while (rc && dma_bits++ < max_dma_bits); + } while (rc && dma_bits++ < MAX_DMA_BITS); if (rc) return rc;