[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1392914159.32657.18.camel@kazak.uk.xensource.com>
Date: Thu, 20 Feb 2014 16:35:59 +0000
From: Ian Campbell <Ian.Campbell@...rix.com>
To: Julien Grall <julien.grall@...aro.org>
CC: <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, <stefano.stabellini@...citrix.com>,
<linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
<xen-devel@...ts.xenproject.org>, Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
Pawel Moll <pawel.moll@....com>,
"Mark Rutland" <mark.rutland@....com>,
Ian Campbell <ijc+devicetree@...lion.org.uk>,
Kumar Gala <galak@...eaurora.org>,
Rob Landley <rob@...dley.net>,
"Russell King" <linux@....linux.org.uk>,
<devicetree@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] arm/xen: Don't use xen DMA ops when the device is
protected by an IOMMU
On Thu, 2014-02-20 at 16:21 +0000, Julien Grall wrote:
> Only Xen is able to know if a device can safely avoid to use xen-swiotlb.
> This patch introduce a new property "protected-devices" for the hypervisor
> node which list device which the IOMMU are been correctly programmed by Xen.
>
> During Linux boot, Xen specific code will create an hash table which
> contains all these devices. The hash table will be used in need_xen_dma_ops
> to check if the Xen DMA ops needs to be used for the current device.
Is it out of the question to find a field within struct device itself to
store this e.g. in struct device_dma_parameters perhaps and avoid the
need for a hashtable lookup.
device->iommu_group might be another option, if we can create our own
group?
Ian.
--
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