[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <BY5PR12MB37641A153EAAC556C85A411FB30E9@BY5PR12MB3764.namprd12.prod.outlook.com>
Date: Thu, 17 Jun 2021 21:18:34 +0000
From: Krishna Reddy <vdumpa@...dia.com>
To: Sai Prakash Ranjan <saiprakash.ranjan@...eaurora.org>,
Robin Murphy <robin.murphy@....com>
CC: "linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org" <linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"iommu@...ts.linux-foundation.org" <iommu@...ts.linux-foundation.org>,
Will Deacon <will@...nel.org>,
"linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org"
<linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
Thierry Reding <treding@...dia.com>
Subject: RE: [PATCH] iommu/io-pgtable-arm: Optimize partial walk flush for
large scatter-gather list
> Instead of flush_ops in init_context hook, perhaps a io_pgtable quirk since this is
> related to tlb, probably a bad name but IO_PGTABLE_QUIRK_TLB_INV which will
> be set in init_context impl hook and the prev condition in
> io_pgtable_tlb_flush_walk()
> becomes something like below. Seems very minimal and neat instead of poking
> into tlb_flush_walk functions or touching dma strict with some flag?
>
> if (iop->cfg.quirks & IO_PGTABLE_QUIRK_NON_STRICT ||
> iop->cfg.quirks & IO_PGTABLE_QUIRK_TLB_INV) {
> iop->cfg.tlb->tlb_flush_all(iop->cookie);
> return;
> }
Can you name it as IO_PGTABLE_QUIRK_TLB_INV_ASID or IO_PGTABLE_QUIRK_TLB_INV_ALL_ASID?
-KR
Powered by blists - more mailing lists