From: "hch@lst.de" <hch@lst.de>
To: Michael Kelley <mhklinux@outlook.com>
Cc: "robin.murphy@arm.com" <robin.murphy@arm.com>,
"joro@8bytes.org" <joro@8bytes.org>,
"will@kernel.org" <will@kernel.org>,
"jgross@suse.com" <jgross@suse.com>,
"sstabellini@kernel.org" <sstabellini@kernel.org>,
"oleksandr_tyshchenko@epam.com" <oleksandr_tyshchenko@epam.com>,
"hch@lst.de" <hch@lst.de>,
"m.szyprowski@samsung.com" <m.szyprowski@samsung.com>,
"petr@tesarici.cz" <petr@tesarici.cz>,
"iommu@lists.linux.dev" <iommu@lists.linux.dev>,
"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
"xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org" <xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC 1/1] swiotlb: Reduce calls to swiotlb_find_pool()
Date: Thu, 27 Jun 2024 08:02:51 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20240627060251.GA15590@lst.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <SN6PR02MB41577686D72E206DB0084E90D4D62@SN6PR02MB4157.namprd02.prod.outlook.com>
On Wed, Jun 26, 2024 at 11:58:13PM +0000, Michael Kelley wrote:
> > This patch trades off making many of the core swiotlb APIs take
> > an additional argument in order to avoid duplicating calls to
> > swiotlb_find_pool(). The current code seems rather wasteful in
> > making 6 calls per round-trip, but I'm happy to accept others'
> > judgment as to whether getting rid of the waste is worth the
> > additional code complexity.
>
> Quick ping on this RFC. Is there any interest in moving forward?
> Quite a few lines of code are affected because of adding the
> additional "pool" argument to several functions, but the change
> is conceptually pretty simple.
Yes, this looks sensible to me. I'm tempted to apply it.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2024-06-27 6:03 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 17+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2024-06-07 3:14 [RFC 1/1] swiotlb: Reduce calls to swiotlb_find_pool() mhkelley58
2024-06-26 23:58 ` Michael Kelley
2024-06-27 6:02 ` hch [this message]
2024-06-27 6:52 ` Petr Tesařík
2024-06-27 14:59 ` Michael Kelley
2024-06-27 15:25 ` hch
2024-06-27 16:02 ` Michael Kelley
2024-06-28 6:01 ` hch
2024-06-28 7:47 ` Petr Tesařík
2024-06-29 15:55 ` Michael Kelley
2024-06-30 5:55 ` hch
2024-06-30 14:02 ` Michael Kelley
2024-07-01 4:36 ` hch
2024-07-01 5:47 ` Petr Tesařík
2024-06-27 7:20 ` Petr Tesařík
2024-06-27 15:04 ` Michael Kelley
2024-06-29 15:53 ` Michael Kelley
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=20240627060251.GA15590@lst.de \
--to=hch@lst.de \
--cc=iommu@lists.linux.dev \
--cc=jgross@suse.com \
--cc=joro@8bytes.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=m.szyprowski@samsung.com \
--cc=mhklinux@outlook.com \
--cc=oleksandr_tyshchenko@epam.com \
--cc=petr@tesarici.cz \
--cc=robin.murphy@arm.com \
--cc=sstabellini@kernel.org \
--cc=will@kernel.org \
--cc=xen-devel@lists.xenproject.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