On 11/27/25 09:23, Viresh Kumar wrote:
On 27-11-25, 09:07, Christian König wrote:
On 11/27/25 08:40, Viresh Kumar wrote:
Move several dma-buf function declarations under CONFIG_DMA_SHARED_BUFFER and provide static inline no-op implementations for the disabled case to allow the callers to build when the feature is not compiled in.
Good point, but which driver actually needs that?
This broke some WIP stuff [1] which isn't posted upstream yet. That's why I didn't mention anything in the commit log, though I could have added a comment about that in the non-commit-log part.
Well then better send that out with the full patch set.
In other words there should be a concrete example of what breaks in the commit message.
There is time for those changes to be posted and not sure if they will be accepted or not. But either way, this change made sense in general and so I thought there is nothing wrong to get this upstream right away.
Yeah when it is unused intermediately then that is usually a no-go even if I agree that it makes sense.
+static inline struct dma_buf *dma_buf_get(int fd) +{
- return NULL;
And here ERR_PTR(-EINVAL).
I am not really sure if this should be EINVAL in this case. EOPNOTSUPP still makes sense as the API isn't supported.
When the API isn't compiled in the fd can't be valid (because you can't create a dma_buf object in the first place).
So returning -EINVAL still makes a lot of sense.
Regards, Christian.
+static inline struct dma_buf *dma_buf_iter_begin(void) +{
- return NULL;
+}
+static inline struct dma_buf *dma_buf_iter_next(struct dma_buf *dmbuf) +{
- return NULL;
+}
Those two are only for BPF and not driver use.
Will drop them.