[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20150608152147.GV20384@8bytes.org>
Date: Mon, 8 Jun 2015 17:21:47 +0200
From: Joerg Roedel <joro@...tes.org>
To: David Woodhouse <dwmw2@...radead.org>
Cc: "Li, Zhen-Hua" <zhen-hual@...com>, indou.takao@...fujitsu.com,
bhe@...hat.com, 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
Hi David,
On Mon, Jun 08, 2015 at 03:15:35PM +0100, David Woodhouse wrote:
> 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?
I put a bigger rework of this on-top of Zhen-Hua's patches, you can find
the result in my x86/vt-d branch. With my patches I also removed this
pointer collecting concept and do the iomap_cache and iounmap calls
before the spin-lock is taken, so this problem is now solved
differently.
> And I think you're misusing VTD_PAGE_{SHIFT,MASK} when you should be
> using the normal PAGE_{SHIFT,MASK}.
I think VT_PAGE_* is correct, since the VT-d driver also runs on ia64.
There the system page-size is different from the VT-d page-size.
>And shouldn't physical addresses be phys_addr_t?
This is changed where appropriate, I hope.
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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists