[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20240630055542.GA5379@lst.de>
Date: Sun, 30 Jun 2024 07:55:42 +0200
From: "hch@....de" <hch@....de>
To: Michael Kelley <mhklinux@...look.com>
Cc: Petr Tesařík <petr@...arici.cz>,
"hch@....de" <hch@....de>,
"robin.murphy@....com" <robin.murphy@....com>,
"joro@...tes.org" <joro@...tes.org>,
"will@...nel.org" <will@...nel.org>,
"jgross@...e.com" <jgross@...e.com>,
"sstabellini@...nel.org" <sstabellini@...nel.org>,
"oleksandr_tyshchenko@...m.com" <oleksandr_tyshchenko@...m.com>,
"m.szyprowski@...sung.com" <m.szyprowski@...sung.com>,
"iommu@...ts.linux.dev" <iommu@...ts.linux.dev>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"xen-devel@...ts.xenproject.org" <xen-devel@...ts.xenproject.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC 1/1] swiotlb: Reduce calls to swiotlb_find_pool()
On Sat, Jun 29, 2024 at 03:55:58PM +0000, Michael Kelley wrote:
> Unless there is further discussion on this point, I'll just keep the original
> "is_swiotlb_buffer()" in v2.
That is the wrong name for something that returns the pool as pointed
out before.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists