All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: gregkh@linuxfoundation.org (gregkh at linuxfoundation.org)
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: [PATCH 2/2] arm/xen: Don't use xen DMA ops when the device is protected by an IOMMU
Date: Mon, 24 Feb 2014 07:16:36 -0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20140224151636.GA13489@kroah.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <alpine.DEB.2.02.1402241214570.4471@kaball.uk.xensource.com>

On Mon, Feb 24, 2014 at 12:19:11PM +0000, Stefano Stabellini wrote:
> CC'ing Greg.
> 
> On Thu, 20 Feb 2014, Ian Campbell wrote:
> > On Thu, 2014-02-20 at 16:21 +0000, Julien Grall wrote:
> > > Only Xen is able to know if a device can safely avoid to use xen-swiotlb.
> > > This patch introduce a new property "protected-devices" for the hypervisor
> > > node which list device which the IOMMU are been correctly programmed by Xen.
> > > 
> > > During Linux boot, Xen specific code will create an hash table which
> > > contains all these devices. The hash table will be used in need_xen_dma_ops
> > > to check if the Xen DMA ops needs to be used for the current device.
> > 
> > Is it out of the question to find a field within struct device itself to
> > store this e.g. in struct device_dma_parameters perhaps and avoid the
> > need for a hashtable lookup.
> > 
> > device->iommu_group might be another option, if we can create our own
> > group?
> 
> I agree that a field in struct device would be ideal.
> Greg, get_maintainer.pl points at you as main maintainer of device.h, do
> you have an opinion on this?

I need a whole lot more context here please.  With a patch would be even
better so that I know exactly what you are referring to...

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: "gregkh-hQyY1W1yCW8ekmWlsbkhG0B+6BGkLq7r@public.gmane.org" <gregkh-hQyY1W1yCW8ekmWlsbkhG0B+6BGkLq7r@public.gmane.org>
To: Stefano Stabellini
	<stefano.stabellini-mvvWK6WmYclDPfheJLI6IQ@public.gmane.org>
Cc: Ian Campbell
	<Ian.Campbell-Sxgqhf6Nn4DQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org>,
	Julien Grall
	<julien.grall-QSEj5FYQhm4dnm+yROfE0A@public.gmane.org>,
	linux-kernel-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org,
	linux-arm-kernel-IAPFreCvJWM7uuMidbF8XUB+6BGkLq7r@public.gmane.org,
	xen-devel-GuqFBffKawtpuQazS67q72D2FQJk+8+b@public.gmane.org,
	Rob Herring <robh+dt-DgEjT+Ai2ygdnm+yROfE0A@public.gmane.org>,
	Pawel Moll <pawel.moll-5wv7dgnIgG8@public.gmane.org>,
	Mark Rutland <mark.rutland-5wv7dgnIgG8@public.gmane.org>,
	Ian Campbell
	<ijc+devicetree-KcIKpvwj1kUDXYZnReoRVg@public.gmane.org>,
	Kumar Gala <galak-sgV2jX0FEOL9JmXXK+q4OQ@public.gmane.org>,
	Rob Landley <rob-VoJi6FS/r0vR7s880joybQ@public.gmane.org>,
	Russell King <linux-lFZ/pmaqli7XmaaqVzeoHQ@public.gmane.org>,
	devicetree-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] arm/xen: Don't use xen DMA ops when the device is protected by an IOMMU
Date: Mon, 24 Feb 2014 07:16:36 -0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20140224151636.GA13489@kroah.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <alpine.DEB.2.02.1402241214570.4471-7Z66fg9igcxYtxbxJUhB2Dgeux46jI+i@public.gmane.org>

On Mon, Feb 24, 2014 at 12:19:11PM +0000, Stefano Stabellini wrote:
> CC'ing Greg.
> 
> On Thu, 20 Feb 2014, Ian Campbell wrote:
> > On Thu, 2014-02-20 at 16:21 +0000, Julien Grall wrote:
> > > Only Xen is able to know if a device can safely avoid to use xen-swiotlb.
> > > This patch introduce a new property "protected-devices" for the hypervisor
> > > node which list device which the IOMMU are been correctly programmed by Xen.
> > > 
> > > During Linux boot, Xen specific code will create an hash table which
> > > contains all these devices. The hash table will be used in need_xen_dma_ops
> > > to check if the Xen DMA ops needs to be used for the current device.
> > 
> > Is it out of the question to find a field within struct device itself to
> > store this e.g. in struct device_dma_parameters perhaps and avoid the
> > need for a hashtable lookup.
> > 
> > device->iommu_group might be another option, if we can create our own
> > group?
> 
> I agree that a field in struct device would be ideal.
> Greg, get_maintainer.pl points at you as main maintainer of device.h, do
> you have an opinion on this?

I need a whole lot more context here please.  With a patch would be even
better so that I know exactly what you are referring to...
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe devicetree" in
the body of a message to majordomo-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: "gregkh@linuxfoundation.org" <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
To: Stefano Stabellini <stefano.stabellini@eu.citrix.com>
Cc: Ian Campbell <Ian.Campbell@citrix.com>,
	Julien Grall <julien.grall@linaro.org>,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
	xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org, Rob Herring <robh+dt@kernel.org>,
	Pawel Moll <pawel.moll@arm.com>,
	Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com>,
	Ian Campbell <ijc+devicetree@hellion.org.uk>,
	Kumar Gala <galak@codeaurora.org>, Rob Landley <rob@landley.net>,
	Russell King <linux@arm.linux.org.uk>,
	devicetree@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] arm/xen: Don't use xen DMA ops when the device is protected by an IOMMU
Date: Mon, 24 Feb 2014 07:16:36 -0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20140224151636.GA13489@kroah.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <alpine.DEB.2.02.1402241214570.4471@kaball.uk.xensource.com>

On Mon, Feb 24, 2014 at 12:19:11PM +0000, Stefano Stabellini wrote:
> CC'ing Greg.
> 
> On Thu, 20 Feb 2014, Ian Campbell wrote:
> > On Thu, 2014-02-20 at 16:21 +0000, Julien Grall wrote:
> > > Only Xen is able to know if a device can safely avoid to use xen-swiotlb.
> > > This patch introduce a new property "protected-devices" for the hypervisor
> > > node which list device which the IOMMU are been correctly programmed by Xen.
> > > 
> > > During Linux boot, Xen specific code will create an hash table which
> > > contains all these devices. The hash table will be used in need_xen_dma_ops
> > > to check if the Xen DMA ops needs to be used for the current device.
> > 
> > Is it out of the question to find a field within struct device itself to
> > store this e.g. in struct device_dma_parameters perhaps and avoid the
> > need for a hashtable lookup.
> > 
> > device->iommu_group might be another option, if we can create our own
> > group?
> 
> I agree that a field in struct device would be ideal.
> Greg, get_maintainer.pl points at you as main maintainer of device.h, do
> you have an opinion on this?

I need a whole lot more context here please.  With a patch would be even
better so that I know exactly what you are referring to...

  reply	other threads:[~2014-02-24 15:16 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 35+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2014-02-20 16:21 [PATCH 2/2] arm/xen: Don't use xen DMA ops when the device is protected by an IOMMU Julien Grall
2014-02-20 16:21 ` Julien Grall
2014-02-20 16:35 ` Ian Campbell
2014-02-20 16:35   ` Ian Campbell
2014-02-20 16:35   ` Ian Campbell
2014-02-24 12:19   ` Stefano Stabellini
2014-02-24 12:19   ` Stefano Stabellini
2014-02-24 12:19     ` Stefano Stabellini
2014-02-24 12:19     ` Stefano Stabellini
2014-02-24 15:16     ` gregkh at linuxfoundation.org [this message]
2014-02-24 15:16       ` gregkh
2014-02-24 15:16       ` gregkh-hQyY1W1yCW8ekmWlsbkhG0B+6BGkLq7r
2014-02-24 20:49       ` Stefano Stabellini
2014-02-24 20:49         ` Stefano Stabellini
2014-02-24 20:49         ` Stefano Stabellini
2014-03-01 15:33         ` Julien Grall
2014-03-01 15:33           ` Julien Grall
2014-03-01 15:33           ` Julien Grall
2014-03-01 15:33         ` Julien Grall
2014-03-14 16:50         ` Julien Grall
2014-03-14 16:50           ` Julien Grall
2014-03-14 16:50           ` Julien Grall
2014-03-14 23:56           ` gregkh
2014-03-14 23:56           ` gregkh at linuxfoundation.org
2014-03-14 23:56             ` gregkh
2014-03-14 23:56             ` gregkh-hQyY1W1yCW8ekmWlsbkhG0B+6BGkLq7r
2014-03-14 16:50         ` Julien Grall
2014-02-24 20:49       ` Stefano Stabellini
2014-02-24 15:16     ` gregkh
2014-02-20 16:35 ` Ian Campbell
     [not found] ` <1392913301-25524-1-git-send-email-julien.grall-QSEj5FYQhm4dnm+yROfE0A@public.gmane.org>
2014-02-20 17:13   ` Ian Campbell
2014-02-20 17:13     ` Ian Campbell
2014-02-20 17:13     ` Ian Campbell
2014-02-20 17:13 ` Ian Campbell
  -- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2014-02-20 16:21 Julien Grall

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=20140224151636.GA13489@kroah.com \
    --to=gregkh@linuxfoundation.org \
    --cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.