[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20080710125439.GO14977@amd.com>
Date: Thu, 10 Jul 2008 14:54:39 +0200
From: Joerg Roedel <joerg.roedel@....com>
To: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
CC: tglx@...utronix.de, mingo@...hat.com, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
iommu@...ts.linux-foundation.org, bhavna.sarathy@....com,
Sebastian.Biemueller@....com, robert.richter@....com,
joro@...tes.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 22/34] AMD IOMMU: add domain allocation and deallocation functions
On Wed, Jul 09, 2008 at 07:14:59PM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
> On Thu, 26 Jun 2008 21:27:58 +0200 Joerg Roedel <joerg.roedel@....com> wrote:
>
> > +static u16 domain_id_alloc(void)
> > +{
> > + unsigned long flags;
> > + int id;
> > +
> > + write_lock_irqsave(&amd_iommu_devtable_lock, flags);
> > + id = find_first_zero_bit(amd_iommu_pd_alloc_bitmap, MAX_DOMAIN_ID);
> > + BUG_ON(id == 0);
> > + if (id > 0 && id < MAX_DOMAIN_ID)
> > + __set_bit(id, amd_iommu_pd_alloc_bitmap);
> > + else
> > + id = 0;
> > + write_unlock_irqrestore(&amd_iommu_devtable_lock, flags);
> > +
> > + return id;
> > +}
>
> Presumably this is not performance-critical. If it is, an IDR
> tree would help.
No, its not performance critical. Domain id allocation is only done at
IOMMU initialization currently. In the future it may also be used at
virtual machine creation when we have device passthrough for KVM.
Joerg
--
| AMD Saxony Limited Liability Company & Co. KG
Operating | Wilschdorfer Landstr. 101, 01109 Dresden, Germany
System | Register Court Dresden: HRA 4896
Research | General Partner authorized to represent:
Center | AMD Saxony LLC (Wilmington, Delaware, US)
| General Manager of AMD Saxony LLC: Dr. Hans-R. Deppe, Thomas McCoy
--
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