[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20080326070616.GI18301@elte.hu>
Date: Wed, 26 Mar 2008 08:06:16 +0100
From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
To: Glauber Costa <gcosta@...hat.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, akpm@...ux-foundation.org,
glommer@...il.com, tglx@...utronix.de,
kvm-devel@...ts.sourceforge.net, avi@...ranet.com,
amit.shah@...ranet.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/20] dma_ops for i386
* Glauber Costa <gcosta@...hat.com> wrote:
> Hello,
>
> Here there is a series of 20 patches that lays the foundations for
> using dma_ops in i386 in the very same way x86_64, as well as many
> other architectures already do.
>
> The functions themselves for i386 are placed in a pci-base_32.c, but
> just a few among them are actually implemented. Most were no-ops
> anyway.
>
> Also, as I said, this is by no means a complete coverage of dma_ops.
> there are still some call sites to be patches in pci-dma_32.c
> (although I don't really plan to change them, but to integrate them in
> a single pci-dma.c). I intend to have it done progressively.
>
> The granularity is per-operation, meaning each patch moves one
> specific function to the common header. This is compiled-tested in
> both i386 and x86_64 in ~5 randconfigs each, and boot-tested in my
> hardware with my default configs
>
> The motivation for that is the ongoing work for pci-passthrough in
> KVM. So ingo, avi, what do you think it's the best way to handle these
> patches through?
looks very nice to me! I've applied it to x86.git, lets see what
happens.
Ingo
--
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