linux-kernel - RE: [v4 2/8] iommu, x86: Define new irte structure for VT-d Posted-Interrupts

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: <E959C4978C3B6342920538CF579893F00248433E@SHSMSX104.ccr.corp.intel.com>
Date:	Wed, 1 Apr 2015 08:51:47 +0000
From:	"Wu, Feng" <feng.wu@...el.com>
To:	Joerg Roedel <joro@...tes.org>
CC:	"dwmw2@...radead.org" <dwmw2@...radead.org>,
	"jiang.liu@...ux.intel.com" <jiang.liu@...ux.intel.com>,
	"iommu@...ts.linux-foundation.org" <iommu@...ts.linux-foundation.org>,
	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	"Wu, Feng" <feng.wu@...el.com>
Subject: RE: [v4 2/8] iommu, x86: Define new irte structure for VT-d
 Posted-Interrupts



> -----Original Message-----
> From: Joerg Roedel [mailto:joro@...tes.org]
> Sent: Tuesday, March 31, 2015 11:17 PM
> To: Wu, Feng
> Cc: dwmw2@...radead.org; jiang.liu@...ux.intel.com;
> iommu@...ts.linux-foundation.org; linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
> Subject: Re: [v4 2/8] iommu, x86: Define new irte structure for VT-d
> Posted-Interrupts
> 
> On Tue, Mar 24, 2015 at 02:32:01AM +0000, Wu, Feng wrote:
> > > I think it is better to put this as a union into struct irte. It saves
> > > memory and unnecessary casting in later patches.
> >
> > Thanks for the comments!
> 
> Thinking more about this, I think its probably fine to keep the two
> versions of the irte seperate like in this patch-set. It allows to
> update the non-posted irte when the posted irte is active at the moment
> and makes the transition between both irte variants easier.
> 
> But what I still don't like is the type casting necessary when calling
> modify_irte(). Can you abstract this and put the decission whether irte
> or irte_pi is set active into modify_irte? It required to change the
> interface of modify_irte, but that should be easy.
> 

Sound good! Then we can keep the difference inside modify_irte().

BTW, could you please have a look at other patches in this series?

Thanks,
Feng

> 
> 	Joerg

--
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/