Linux IOMMU Development
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Christoph Hellwig <hch-wEGCiKHe2LqWVfeAwA7xHQ@public.gmane.org>
To: Robin Murphy <robin.murphy-5wv7dgnIgG8@public.gmane.org>
Cc: iommu-cunTk1MwBs9QetFLy7KEm3xJsTq8ys+cHZ5vskTnxNA@public.gmane.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] iommu: Do physical merging in iommu_map_sg()
Date: Fri, 5 Oct 2018 00:19:34 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20181005071934.GA9238@infradead.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1be92cab99ba7fc82cc355bdda239f2ddcb92db0.1538667993.git.robin.murphy-5wv7dgnIgG8@public.gmane.org>

On Thu, Oct 04, 2018 at 04:47:37PM +0100, Robin Murphy wrote:
> The original motivation for iommu_map_sg() was to give IOMMU drivers the
> chance to map an IOVA-contiguous scatterlist as efficiently as they
> could. It turns out that there isn't really much driver-specific
> business involved there, so now that the default implementation is
> mandatory let's just improve that - the main thing we're after is to use
> larger pages wherever possible, and as long as domain->pgsize_bitmap
> reflects reality, iommu_map() can already do that in a generic way. All
> we need to do is detect physically-contiguous segments and batch them
> into a single map operation, since whatever we do here is transparent to
> our caller and not bound by any segment-length restrictions on the list
> itself.
> 
> Speaking of efficiency, there's really very little point in duplicating
> the checks that iommu_map() is going to do anyway, so those get cleared
> up in the process.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Robin Murphy <robin.murphy-5wv7dgnIgG8@public.gmane.org>

I like the idea, but I find the goto usage to jump back into the just
terminated loop highly confusing.  Would it be that much worse to simply
duplicate the iommu_map call?

  parent reply	other threads:[~2018-10-05  7:19 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2018-10-04 15:47 [PATCH] iommu: Do physical merging in iommu_map_sg() Robin Murphy
     [not found] ` <1be92cab99ba7fc82cc355bdda239f2ddcb92db0.1538667993.git.robin.murphy-5wv7dgnIgG8@public.gmane.org>
2018-10-05  7:19   ` Christoph Hellwig [this message]
     [not found]     ` <20181005071934.GA9238-wEGCiKHe2LqWVfeAwA7xHQ@public.gmane.org>
2018-10-05 10:57       ` Robin Murphy
     [not found]         ` <13093b94-be59-030d-7176-16dab22bcdce-5wv7dgnIgG8@public.gmane.org>
2018-10-07 10:38           ` Christoph Hellwig

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=20181005071934.GA9238@infradead.org \
    --to=hch-wegcikhe2lqwvfeawa7xhq@public.gmane.org \
    --cc=iommu-cunTk1MwBs9QetFLy7KEm3xJsTq8ys+cHZ5vskTnxNA@public.gmane.org \
    --cc=robin.murphy-5wv7dgnIgG8@public.gmane.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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox