From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mailout1.w1.samsung.com (mailout1.w1.samsung.com [210.118.77.11]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 946093CA49D; Tue, 6 Oct 2026 21:43:02 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=210.118.77.11 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1791322985; cv=none; b=QiKrzKRW0Fz5sPEQ2wuk4Ko47E/VeKtLTzodldVPHNfssLrUe9oiMvdt6zCy4cjWWF+4CCTKGSUVuK/Krv4dKXWvXjwi6kHw2KoLRikhMY6tcNhAy7lVVAsO5FgTgTOWKDMnF2xN2xanFmQVaIot8AeqbB6oWUEbHnIkFYdR/UI= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1791322985; c=relaxed/simple; bh=oCSkRp6GuCzlh/94BooGUaQCzy26rKPOU+FL0sDDpuE=; h=Message-ID:Date:MIME-Version:Subject:To:Cc:From:In-Reply-To: Content-Type:References; b=qGLygcqJK0UAK5itimXBil9F5KxLKLTu1CBm4dgnggKeo4R1vQ+CqKNjz/FVpVXalKdv5qBIhm9Y6AexVBbWSQ6ENysRBy6VX4PVaM8vcwQfCE0WSk9nNk+oS3t2D4zOPC/8DkBBX7saErhnE+1wbTdP8RSJBVZQ8m9+6BVjqWw= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=samsung.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=samsung.com; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=samsung.com header.i=@samsung.com header.b=X7izBr5m; arc=none smtp.client-ip=210.118.77.11 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=samsung.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=samsung.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=samsung.com header.i=@samsung.com header.b="X7izBr5m" Received: from eucas1p2.samsung.com (unknown [182.198.249.207]) by mailout1.w1.samsung.com (KnoxPortal) with ESMTP id 20261006214259euoutp01c5bc7ee57334b408af09a066c2d8412b~cDsI8Wk8f1988319883euoutp01S; Tue, 6 Oct 2026 21:42:59 +0000 (GMT) DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 mailout1.w1.samsung.com 20261006214259euoutp01c5bc7ee57334b408af09a066c2d8412b~cDsI8Wk8f1988319883euoutp01S DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=samsung.com; s=mail20170921; t=1791322979; bh=ZioSMG43MEHFd9pfn3EIJe0Ig/c7Qq/kf97OHfOELpI=; h=Date:Subject:To:Cc:From:In-Reply-To:References:From; b=X7izBr5m8cmXF7INH1PfY//K2/ri63BnSaoZWWQn+J7F7DSyWLAOh8zyLCqoA49T1 fLrFXwNe1fB08G783PVdG9eZQswPfnng02g4QBXO6NsFZq0Etq3vQI7hHj5Ixmn3ua C9iDLQSmItu72iRpHKjS66EAZ/bv/+aIrijM19SA= Received: from eusmtip2.samsung.com (unknown [203.254.199.222]) by eucas1p2.samsung.com (KnoxPortal) with ESMTPA id 20261006214258eucas1p21c51f2c73891f0ad8a848a058ab4e7b2~cDsH4gZff0914409144eucas1p2i; Tue, 6 Oct 2026 21:42:58 +0000 (GMT) Received: from [106.210.134.192] (unknown [106.210.134.192]) by eusmtip2.samsung.com (KnoxPortal) with ESMTPA id 20261006214255eusmtip2826fd9cdfb4c80046b451ff2238aee5d~cDsFarzwa1576315763eusmtip2a; Tue, 6 Oct 2026 21:42:55 +0000 (GMT) Message-ID: Date: Tue, 6 Oct 2026 23:42:54 +0200 Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Betterbird (Windows) Subject: Re: [PATCH v6 0/8] dma: swiotlb: Centralize default pool policy and sizing To: "Aneesh Kumar K.V (Arm)" , iommu@lists.linux.dev, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Cc: Robin Murphy , Jonathan Corbet , Shuah Khan , Randy Dunlap , Will Deacon , Mark Rutland , Marc Zyngier , Steven Price , Suzuki K Poulose , Catalin Marinas , Jiri Pirko , Jason Gunthorpe , Mostafa Saleh , Petr Tesarik , Alexey Kardashevskiy , Dan Williams , Xu Yilun , Madhavan Srinivasan , Michael Ellerman , Nicholas Piggin , "Christophe Leroy (CS GROUP)" , "Ritesh Harjani (IBM)" , Shrikanth Hegde , Alexander Gordeev , Gerald Schaefer , Heiko Carstens , Vasily Gorbik , Christian Borntraeger , Sven Schnelle , Stefano Stabellini , Russell King , Huacai Chen , WANG Xuerui , Thomas Bogendoerfer , Jiaxun Yang , Paul Walmsley , Palmer Dabbelt , Albert Ou , Alexandre Ghiti , Andy Lutomirski , Peter Zijlstra , Thomas Gleixner , Ingo Molnar , Borislav Petkov , Dave Hansen , "H. Peter Anvin" , linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, loongarch@lists.linux.dev, linux-mips@vger.kernel.org, linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org, linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org, linux-s390@vger.kernel.org, x86@kernel.org Content-Language: en-US From: Marek Szyprowski In-Reply-To: <20260924060756.1325156-1-aneesh.kumar@kernel.org> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-CMS-MailID: 20261006214258eucas1p21c51f2c73891f0ad8a848a058ab4e7b2 X-Msg-Generator: CA Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" X-RootMTR: 20260924060823eucas1p1d27fbf57221c9b4c0e9831a9b0cdd7d3 X-EPHeader: CA X-CMS-RootMailID: 20260924060823eucas1p1d27fbf57221c9b4c0e9831a9b0cdd7d3 References: <20260924060756.1325156-1-aneesh.kumar@kernel.org> On 24.09.2026 08:07, Aneesh Kumar K.V (Arm) wrote: > This series centralizes swiotlb default-pool selection and sizing, and > simplifies the initialization flags used to describe pool placement. > > The first patch replaces the addressing-limit argument with initialization > flags and introduces explicit policies for the different reasons a default > pool may be needed. Architectures now report DMA addressing constraints with > SWIOTLB_INIT_ADDRESSING_LIMIT, while the core selects the corresponding pool > policy. > > The second patch moves the reduced sizing used when the pool is needed only > for unaligned kmalloc bouncing from arm64 and RISC-V into the swiotlb core. > > The third patch centralizes swiotlb sizing for memory-encrypted systems. It > moves the existing x86 guest-sizing policy into the core. Host memory > encryption retains the normal pool size, and a shared default pool is not > selected solely for guest memory encryption when a restricted DMA pool is > present. > > The fourth patch removes SWIOTLB_ANY. Pool placement is derived directly from > SWIOTLB_INIT_ADDRESSING_LIMIT: pools required for limited DMA addressing are > allocated below the architecture's low address limit, while other pools may > be allocated anywhere in directly mapped memory. Xen continues to request a > pool explicitly with SWIOTLB_INIT_REMAP without imposing a low-address > constraint. I will give this patchset a chance in linux-next. If one feels that it still needs to be improved or sees any other reason why it shouldn't be merged, let me know asap. Applied to dma-mapping-for-next. Best regards -- Marek Szyprowski, PhD Samsung R&D Institute Poland