linux-kernel - Re: [RFC] mm: iommu: An API to unify IOMMU, CPU and device memory management

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

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <876318ager.fsf@basil.nowhere.org>
Date:	Thu, 24 Jun 2010 12:11:56 +0200
From:	Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>
To:	Zach Pfeffer <zpfeffer@...eaurora.org>
Cc:	mel@....ul.ie, dwalker@...eaurora.org, linux-mm@...ck.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-omap@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC] mm: iommu: An API to unify IOMMU, CPU and device memory management

Zach Pfeffer <zpfeffer@...eaurora.org> writes:

> This patch contains the documentation for and the main header file of
> the API, termed the Virtual Contiguous Memory Manager. Its use would
> allow all of the IOMMU to VM, VM to device and device to IOMMU
> interoperation code to be refactored into platform independent code.

I read all the description and it's still unclear what advantage
this all has over the current architecture? 

At least all the benefits mentioned seem to be rather nebulous.

Can you describe a concrete use case that is improved by this code
directly?

-Andi

-- 
ak@...ux.intel.com -- Speaking for myself only.
--
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/