Re: [RFC PATCH 0/4] Genericise the IOVA allocator

[Joerg Roedel <joro-zLv9SwRftAIdnm+yROfE0A@public.gmane.org>]

Hi Robin,

On Tue, Nov 25, 2014 at 05:27:24PM +0000, Robin Murphy wrote:
> Hi all,
> 
> I've been implementing IOMMU DMA mapping for arm64, based on tidied-up
> parts of the existing arch/arm/mm/dma-mapping.c with a clear divide
> between the arch-specific parts and the general DMA-API to IOMMU-API layer
> so that that can be shared; similar to what Ritesh started before and was
> unable to complete[1], but working in the other direction.
> 
> The first part of that tidy-up involved ripping out the homebrewed IOVA
> allocator and plumbing in iova.c, necessitating the changes presented here.
> The rest is currently sat under arch/arm64 for the sake of getting it
> working quickly with minimal impact - ideally I'd move it out and port
> arch/arm before merging, but I don't know quite how impatient people are.
> Regardless of that decision, this bit stands alone, so here it is.
> 
> Feel free to ignore patches 1 and 2, since I see Sakari has recently
> posted a more thorough series for that[2], that frankly looks nicer ;)
> I've merely left them in as context here.
> 
> [1]:http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.linux.ports.arm.kernel/331299
> [2]:http://article.gmane.org/gmane.linux.kernel.iommu/7436
> 
> Robin Murphy (4):
>   iommu: build iova.c for any IOMMU
>   iommu: consolidate IOVA allocator code
>   iommu: make IOVA domain low limit flexible
>   iommu: make IOVA domain page size explicit

Thanks for doing this, I like this patch-set.

I would also appreciate if someone from Intel could have a look at it,
David?

Besides, can you please re-post this patch-set rebased to latest
upstream with the better versions of patch 1 and 2, please?

I consider to apply these changes then.


	Joerg