[PATCH 2/9] Move dma_ops from archdata into struct device

[Bart Van Assche]

On Wed, 2017-01-11 at 07:48 +0100, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 10, 2017 at 04:56:41PM -0800, Bart Van Assche wrote:
> > Several RDMA drivers, e.g. drivers/infiniband/hw/qib, use the CPU to
> > transfer data between memory and PCIe adapter. Because of performance
> > reasons it is important that the CPU cache is not flushed when such
> > drivers transfer data. Make this possible by allowing these drivers to
> > override the dma_map_ops pointer. Additionally, introduce the function
> > set_dma_ops() that will be used by a later patch in this series.
> 
> When you say things like "additionally", that's a huge flag that this
> needs to be split up into multiple patches.  No need to add
> set_dma_ops() here in this patch.

Hello Greg,

Some architectures already define a set_dma_ops() function. So what this
patch does is to move both the dma_ops pointer and the set_dma_ops()
function from architecture-specific to architecture independent code. I
don't think that it is possible to separate these two changes. But I
understand that how I formulated the patch description caused confusion. I
will rewrite the patch description to make it more clear before I repost
this patch series.

> And I'd argue that it should be dma_ops_set(), and dma_ops_get(), just
> to keep the namespace sane, but that's probably a different set of
> patches...

Every time I rebase and retest this patch series on top of a new kernel
version I have to modify some of the patches to compensate for changes in
the architecture code. So I expect that once Linus merges these patches that
he will have to resolve one or more merge conflicts. Including a rename of
the functions that query and set the dma_ops pointer in this patch series
would increase the number of merge conflicts triggered by this patch series
and would make Linus' job harder. So I hope that you will allow me to
postpone that rename until a later time ...

Bart.