From: "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@linux.intel.com>
To: Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk <konrad.wilk@oracle.com>
Cc: fujita.tomonori@lab.ntt.co.jp, JBeulich@novell.com,
jeremy@goop.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Modularizing IOMMUs (devel/iommu-0.4)
Date: Wed, 20 Oct 2010 13:23:53 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4CBF4FD9.2090804@linux.intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20101020202006.GA30096@dumpdata.com>
On 10/20/2010 01:20 PM, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk wrote:
> Hey Peter, Tomo-san, Jan and Jeremy, and LKML:
>
> I was wondering if I could run this idea by you guys. One of the things that
> Peter proposed was in some ways to "modularize" the IOMMUs (and potentially
> later on use that framework to "modularize" other built-in components). For details:
> http://lkml.org/lkml/2010/8/2/282 and the follow-on threads.
>
> If you want to look at code right away, I've some beginnings at:
>
> git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/konrad/swiotlb-2.6.git devel/iommu-0.4
> (look at patches past swiotlb-xen: Remove the unnecessary EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL macros)
>
> The 10,000 ft view is that during bootup, we want to jettison those IOMMUs
> that are built-in, but actually aren't used b/c the machine does not have it.
> Once it is identified which one we don't want, we mark those sections as available
> for the kernel memory subsystem and we can shed some kilobytes.
>
> So the first step is to identify the functions for the IOMMUs. And also
> group them tightly together. The path I pursued was to stick all of the
> executable sections in clearly identifiable sections that can be
> easily identified.
>
I think a much better way to do this is something I discussed with Linus
at least 12 years ago, which is allow modules to be built into the
kernel, but still be unloadable using the actual module mechanism. This
means they are part of the full kernel image and therefore immediately
available, but appear to the module system as an already-installed
module. Then we can unload modules to free up space.
This would be a handy thing to have in general, and would simplify this
kind of stuff tremendously.
-hpa
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2010-10-20 20:23 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2010-10-20 20:20 Modularizing IOMMUs (devel/iommu-0.4) Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk
2010-10-20 20:23 ` H. Peter Anvin [this message]
2010-10-22 7:52 ` Jan Beulich
2010-10-22 13:54 ` Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk
2010-10-22 17:13 ` H. Peter Anvin
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=4CBF4FD9.2090804@linux.intel.com \
--to=hpa@linux.intel.com \
--cc=JBeulich@novell.com \
--cc=fujita.tomonori@lab.ntt.co.jp \
--cc=jeremy@goop.org \
--cc=konrad.wilk@oracle.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.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