From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Muli Ben-Yehuda Subject: Re: [PATCH 9/9] x86/iommu: use dma_ops_list in get_dma_ops Date: Mon, 29 Sep 2008 12:25:49 +0300 Message-ID: <20080929092549.GA6931@il.ibm.com> References: <1222107681-8185-1-git-send-email-joerg.roedel@amd.com> <1222107681-8185-10-git-send-email-joerg.roedel@amd.com> <20080928231211X.fujita.tomonori@lab.ntt.co.jp> <20080928184424.GA26563@8bytes.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: FUJITA Tomonori , joerg.roedel@amd.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, kvm@vger.kernel.org, iommu@lists.linux-foundation.org, dwmw2@infradead.org, amit.shah@qumranet.com, mingo@redhat.com To: Joerg Roedel Return-path: Received: from mtagate2.uk.ibm.com ([194.196.100.162]:39302 "EHLO mtagate2.uk.ibm.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752976AbYI2J0b (ORCPT ); Mon, 29 Sep 2008 05:26:31 -0400 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20080928184424.GA26563@8bytes.org> Sender: kvm-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Sun, Sep 28, 2008 at 08:44:24PM +0200, Joerg Roedel wrote: > Hmm, we should only call find_dma_ops_for_device() the first time a > dma api call is done (look into get_dma_ops). But I also thought > about how this lock can be avoided. In the real world it should not > be necessary because the dma_ops list is initialized before dma api > calls are done. But since there is now a register function which can > be called its safer this way. What do you think, are we still safe > enough without this lock? We could be, if we add a check to the register function that verifies it isn't being called after DMAs have started. Something like: in register: if (dma_started) yell loudly before PCI device initialization and after IOMMU initialization: dma_started = true Cheers, Muli -- The First Workshop on I/O Virtualization (WIOV '08) Dec 2008, San Diego, CA, http://www.usenix.org/wiov08/ xxx SYSTOR 2009---The Israeli Experimental Systems Conference http://www.haifa.il.ibm.com/conferences/systor2009/