| lists.openwall.net | 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 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC | |
|
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
| ||
|
Message-ID: <482CAEE6.5080509@firstfloor.org> Date: Thu, 15 May 2008 23:45:10 +0200 From: Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org> To: Muli Ben-Yehuda <muli@...ibm.com> CC: FUJITA Tomonori <fujita.tomonori@....ntt.co.jp>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, akpm@...ux-foundation.org, alexisb@...ibm.com Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/2] x86: per-device dma_mapping_ops Muli Ben-Yehuda wrote: > On Thu, May 15, 2008 at 11:03:40PM +0200, Andi Kleen wrote: >> On Thu, May 15, 2008 at 06:26:31PM +0300, Muli Ben-Yehuda wrote: >>> On Thu, May 15, 2008 at 06:41:26PM +0900, FUJITA Tomonori wrote: >>> >>>> I thought that KVM people want to do it per device (in the first >>>> case). So with my patchse, they can replace the dma_ops pointer >>>> in dev_archdata with what they want. >>> That's my understanding too. We use stackable ops as a poor man's >>> replacement for per-device ops (depending on what kind of device >>> it is, call the original ops or our pvdma ops). >> But in the KVM case you still need to support the underlying ops >> too, e.g. in case of bouncing through swiotlb needed > > Good point, although "secondary" DMA-ops should only be needed in rare > cases Even rare cases need to be handled. In the nodma bitmap case it was the same always btw -Andi -- 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