[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <48D45E21-9B4B-40AB-A698-5386E08A6646@arista.com>
Date: Fri, 22 Mar 2019 10:07:01 +0000
From: James Sewart <jamessewart@...sta.com>
To: Jacob Pan <jacob.jun.pan@...ux.intel.com>
Cc: iommu@...ts.linux-foundation.org, Tom Murphy <tmurphy@...sta.com>,
Dmitry Safonov <dima@...sta.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Lu Baolu <baolu.lu@...ux.intel.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 7/7] iommu/vt-d: Remove lazy allocation of domains
Hey Jacob,
> On 14 Mar 2019, at 23:35, Jacob Pan <jacob.jun.pan@...ux.intel.com> wrote:
>
> On Thu, 14 Mar 2019 11:59:36 +0000
> James Sewart <jamessewart@...sta.com> wrote:
>
>>
>> - domain = get_valid_domain_for_dev(dev);
>> + domain = find_domain(dev);
>> if (!domain)
>> return DMA_MAPPING_ERROR;
>>
>> @@ -3914,7 +3624,7 @@ static int intel_map_sg(struct device *dev,
>> struct scatterlist *sglist, int nele if (iommu_no_mapping(dev))
>> return intel_nontranslate_map_sg(dev, sglist,
>> nelems, dir);
>> - domain = get_valid_domain_for_dev(dev);
>> + domain = find_domain(dev);
> This patchset looks like a very good clean up, I am wondering why we
> can't use the generic iommu_get_domain_for_dev() here, since VT-d has a
> default DMA domain after your patch.
This should be possible, only downside is we get an iommu_domain from
iommu_get_domain_for_dev and will have to check its not null before
getting the dmar_domain from it. We will be able to remove find_domain
though.
Cheers,
James.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists