From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand
        id S967285AbeEYQfw (ORCPT <rfc822;w@1wt.eu>);
        Fri, 25 May 2018 12:35:52 -0400
Received: from mail.kernel.org ([198.145.29.99]:35720 "EHLO mail.kernel.org"
        rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP
        id S967031AbeEYQfv (ORCPT <rfc822;linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>);
        Fri, 25 May 2018 12:35:51 -0400
Date: Fri, 25 May 2018 18:35:32 +0200
From: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
To: Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>
Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>,
        Tony Luck <tony.luck@intel.com>, Fenghua Yu <fenghua.yu@intel.com>,
        x86@kernel.org, iommu@lists.linux-foundation.org,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-ia64@vger.kernel.org,
        netdev@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/7] core, dma-direct: add a flag 32-bit dma limits
Message-ID: <20180525163532.GA13399@kroah.com>
References: <20180525143512.1466-1-hch@lst.de>
 <20180525143512.1466-2-hch@lst.de>
 <20180525145012.GA3863@kroah.com>
 <20180525162307.GB28900@lst.de>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20180525162307.GB28900@lst.de>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.10.0 (2018-05-17)
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org>
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org

On Fri, May 25, 2018 at 06:23:07PM +0200, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> On Fri, May 25, 2018 at 04:50:12PM +0200, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> > On Fri, May 25, 2018 at 04:35:06PM +0200, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> > > Various PCI bridges (VIA PCI, Xilinx PCIe) limit DMA to only 32-bits
> > > even if the device itself supports more.  Add a single bit flag to
> > > struct device (to be moved into the dma extension once we around it)
> > 
> > "once we around it"?  I don't understand, sorry.
> 
> Should be "once we get around it", which in proper grammar should
> probably be "once we get to it".  Anyway, the point is that right
> now struct device is bloated with a lot of fields for dma/iommu
> purposes and we need to clean this up.  It's been on my TODO list
> for a while.

Ah, makes sense, that's fine with me, I'd love to see that get cleaned
up.

thanks,

greg k-h