[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20080929092549.GA6931@il.ibm.com>
Date: Mon, 29 Sep 2008 12:25:49 +0300
From: Muli Ben-Yehuda <muli@...ibm.com>
To: Joerg Roedel <joro@...tes.org>
Cc: FUJITA Tomonori <fujita.tomonori@....ntt.co.jp>,
joerg.roedel@....com, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
kvm@...r.kernel.org, iommu@...ts.linux-foundation.org,
dwmw2@...radead.org, amit.shah@...ranet.com, mingo@...hat.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 9/9] x86/iommu: use dma_ops_list in get_dma_ops
On Sun, Sep 28, 2008 at 08:44:24PM +0200, Joerg Roedel wrote:
> Hmm, we should only call find_dma_ops_for_device() the first time a
> dma api call is done (look into get_dma_ops). But I also thought
> about how this lock can be avoided. In the real world it should not
> be necessary because the dma_ops list is initialized before dma api
> calls are done. But since there is now a register function which can
> be called its safer this way. What do you think, are we still safe
> enough without this lock?
We could be, if we add a check to the register function that verifies
it isn't being called after DMAs have started. Something like:
in register:
if (dma_started)
yell loudly
before PCI device initialization and after IOMMU initialization:
dma_started = true
Cheers,
Muli
--
The First Workshop on I/O Virtualization (WIOV '08)
Dec 2008, San Diego, CA, http://www.usenix.org/wiov08/
xxx
SYSTOR 2009---The Israeli Experimental Systems Conference
http://www.haifa.il.ibm.com/conferences/systor2009/
--
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