[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <BN9PR11MB527629949E7D44BED080400C8C12A@BN9PR11MB5276.namprd11.prod.outlook.com>
Date: Wed, 9 Aug 2023 00:02:50 +0000
From: "Tian, Kevin" <kevin.tian@...el.com>
To: Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@...pe.ca>
CC: Lu Baolu <baolu.lu@...ux.intel.com>,
Joerg Roedel <joro@...tes.org>,
"Will Deacon" <will@...nel.org>,
Robin Murphy <robin.murphy@....com>,
"Jean-Philippe Brucker" <jean-philippe@...aro.org>,
Nicolin Chen <nicolinc@...dia.com>,
"Liu, Yi L" <yi.l.liu@...el.com>,
Jacob Pan <jacob.jun.pan@...ux.intel.com>,
"iommu@...ts.linux.dev" <iommu@...ts.linux.dev>,
"kvm@...r.kernel.org" <kvm@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: RE: [PATCH v2 08/12] iommu: Prepare for separating SVA and IOPF
> From: Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@...pe.ca>
> Sent: Wednesday, August 9, 2023 2:43 AM
>
> On Thu, Aug 03, 2023 at 08:16:47AM +0000, Tian, Kevin wrote:
>
> > Is there plan to introduce further error in the future? otherwise this should
> > be void.
> >
> > btw the work queue is only for sva. If there is no other caller this can be
> > just kept in iommu-sva.c. No need to create a helper.
>
> I think more than just SVA will need a work queue context to process
> their faults.
>
then this series needs more work. Currently the abstraction doesn't
include workqueue in the common fault reporting layer.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists