lists  /  announce  owl-users  owl-dev  john-users  john-dev  passwdqc-users  yescrypt  popa3d-users  /  oss-security  kernel-hardening  musl  sabotage  tlsify  passwords  /  crypt-dev  xvendor  /  Bugtraq  Full-Disclosure  linux-kernel  linux-netdev  linux-ext4  PHC 
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.
[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date:	Mon, 12 Nov 2007 15:32:07 +0200
From:	Muli Ben-Yehuda <>
To:	Amit Shah <>
Subject: Re: [kvm-devel] [PATCH 3/8] KVM: PVDMA Guest: Guest-side routines for paravirtualized DMA

On Mon, Nov 12, 2007 at 05:26:24PM +0530, Amit Shah wrote:
> On Monday 12 November 2007 16:20:01 Muli Ben-Yehuda wrote:
> > On Wed, Nov 07, 2007 at 04:21:04PM +0200, Amit Shah wrote:
> > > We make the dma_mapping_ops structure to point to our structure so
> > > that every DMA access goes through us. (This is the reason this only
> > > works for 64-bit guest. 32-bit guest doesn't yet have a dma_ops
> > > struct.)
> >
> > I need the same facility for Calgary for falling back to swiotlb if a
> > translation is disabled on some slot, and IB needs the same facility
> > for some IB adapters (e.g., ipath). Perhaps it's time to consider
> > stackable dma-ops (unless someone has a better idea...).
> That would make great sense and simplify implementations.
> How do you propose such an implementation? An array of function
> pointers for each possible call?

I was thinking of simply a chain of dma_ops (via dma_ops->prev_ops) ,
where it's the responsibility of each dma_ops implementation to call
or not call the corresponding entry in chain (prev_ops->op()). This
works well for Calgary (which will only use prev_ops selectively, and
I think it will work well for the IB folks. Will it work for you?

To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to
More majordomo info at
Please read the FAQ at

Powered by blists - more mailing lists