[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1433772935.2952.47.camel@infradead.org>
Date: Mon, 08 Jun 2015 15:15:35 +0100
From: David Woodhouse <dwmw2@...radead.org>
To: "Li, Zhen-Hua" <zhen-hual@...com>
Cc: indou.takao@...fujitsu.com, bhe@...hat.com, joro@...tes.org,
vgoyal@...hat.com, dyoung@...hat.com,
iommu@...ts.linux-foundation.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-pci@...r.kernel.org, kexec@...ts.infradead.org,
alex.williamson@...hat.com, ddutile@...hat.com,
ishii.hironobu@...fujitsu.com, bhelgaas@...gle.com,
doug.hatch@...com, jerry.hoemann@...com, tom.vaden@...com,
li.zhang6@...com, lisa.mitchell@...com, billsumnerlinux@...il.com,
rwright@...com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v11 04/10] iommu/vt-d: functions to copy data from old
mem
On Mon, 2015-05-11 at 17:52 +0800, Li, Zhen-Hua wrote:
> Add some functions to copy the data from old kernel.
> These functions are used to copy context tables and page tables.
>
> To avoid calling iounmap between spin_lock_irqsave and
> spin_unlock_irqrestore,
> use a link here, store the pointers , and then use iounmap to free
> them in
> another place.
>
> Li, Zhen-hua:
> The functions and logics.
Surely this isn't specific to the Intel IOMMU? Shouldn't it live
elsewhere — either in generic IOMMU code or perhaps in generic kexec
support code?
Don't we need to solve the same kexec problem on *all* platforms with
an IOMMU, and won't they all need something like this?
And I think you're misusing VTD_PAGE_{SHIFT,MASK} when you should be
using the normal PAGE_{SHIFT,MASK}. And shouldn't physical addresses be
phys_addr_t?
--
David Woodhouse Open Source Technology Centre
David.Woodhouse@...el.com Intel Corporation
Download attachment "smime.p7s" of type "application/x-pkcs7-signature" (5691 bytes)
Powered by blists - more mailing lists