[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <A6AD88C3F2289247BE726C37303E1EB894F11D64@orsmsx505.amr.corp.intel.com>
Date: Wed, 18 Feb 2009 09:28:44 -0800
From: "Yu, Fenghua" <fenghua.yu@...el.com>
To: 'Ingo Molnar' <mingo@...e.hu>,
'Linus Torvalds' <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
CC: 'David Woodhouse' <dwmw2@...radead.org>,
'Stephen Rothwell' <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>,
"'iommu@...ts.linux-foundation.org'"
<iommu@...ts.linux-foundation.org>,
'LKML' <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: RE: [PATCH] Suspend and Resume Support for Intel IOMMU
>> On Wed, 18 Feb 2009, Fenghua Yu wrote:
>> >
>> > +static int vtd_enabled;
>> ..
>> > +static int iommu_resume(struct sys_device *dev)
>> > +{
>> ..
>> > + if (!vtd_enabled)
>> > + return 0;
>>
>> Hmm. Why do this?
>>
>> Wouldn't it be much more logical to only register the
>> iommu_sysdev if the thing is enabled, rather than having an
>> odd flag that gets tested at runtime?
>
>The sysdev_class_register() could be done straight in
>intel_iommu_init(), because that gets called by pci_iommu_init()
>which is an fs_initcall() - so all the sysdev facilities should
>be up and running already.
That was my original concern. I'll remove the vtd_enabled flag and
register device_iommu in intel_iommu_init() in an updated patch.
Thanks.
-Fenghua
--
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