[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date: Mon, 6 Jun 2011 23:09:33 +0300
From: Ohad Ben-Cohen <ohad@...ery.com>
To: "Roedel, Joerg" <Joerg.Roedel@....com>
Cc: "linux-media@...r.kernel.org" <linux-media@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-omap@...r.kernel.org" <linux-omap@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org"
<linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
"laurent.pinchart@...asonboard.com"
<laurent.pinchart@...asonboard.com>,
"Hiroshi.DOYU@...ia.com" <Hiroshi.DOYU@...ia.com>,
"arnd@...db.de" <arnd@...db.de>,
"davidb@...eaurora.org" <davidb@...eaurora.org>,
Omar Ramirez Luna <omar.ramirez@...com>
Subject: Re: [RFC 0/6] iommu: generic api migration and grouping
On Mon, Jun 6, 2011 at 10:20 PM, Roedel, Joerg <Joerg.Roedel@....com> wrote:
> Well, it certainly makes sense to have a single implementation for this.
> But I want to hide this complexity to the user of the IOMMU-API. The
> best choice is to put this into the layer between the IOMMU-API and the
> backend implementation.
I agree.
The IOMMU API should take physically contiguous regions from the user,
split them up according to page-sizes (/alignment requirements)
supported by the hardware, and then tell the underlying implementation
what to map where.
> That interface is not put into stone. There were other complains about
> the ->unmap part recently, so there is certainly room for improvement
> there.
Once the supported page sizes are exposed to the framework, the
current ->unmap API should probably be enough. 'va' + 'order' sounds
like all the information an implementation needs to unmap a page.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists