Subject: Re: [PATCH v19 00/14] crypto/dmaengine: qce: introduce BAM locking and use DMA for register I/O

From: Stephan Gerhold <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 2 Jun 2026 18:38:21 +0200

On Tue, May 26, 2026 at 03:10:48PM +0200, Bartosz Golaszewski wrote:
> I feel like I fell into the trap of trying to address pre-existing
> issues reported by sashiko and in the process provoking more reports so
> let this be the last iteration where I do this. Vinod can we get this
> queued for v7.2 now and iron out any previously existing problems in
> tree?

Thanks a lot for working on fixing all these issues!

I agree there is no point addressing all the "pre-existing issues"
pointed out by Sashiko, but have you looked through the other comments
for new issues pointed out for your patches?

Out of curiosity, I was looking a bit at the comments for [PATCH v19
06/14] dmaengine: qcom: bam_dma: add support for BAM locking [1]. There
are 8 open comments there (Critical: 1, High: 6 and Medium: 1). From a
quick look I would say most of these could be valid. The critical one
about the usage of dma_cookie_assign() sounds a bit concerning to me, if
it is true we would be basically breaking parts of the dmaengine API for
consumers by inserting the lock descriptor in front of everything else.

[1]: https://sashiko.dev/#/patchset/20260526-qcom-qce-cmd-descr-v19-0-08472fdcbf4a%40oss.qualcomm.com?part=6

Thanks,
Stephan