[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <421bb6af-4b7b-4987-8db2-037a39d43078@linux.intel.com>
Date: Wed, 26 Feb 2025 11:57:31 +0800
From: Baolu Lu <baolu.lu@...ux.intel.com>
To: "Tian, Kevin" <kevin.tian@...el.com>, Joerg Roedel <joro@...tes.org>,
Will Deacon <will@...nel.org>, Robin Murphy <robin.murphy@....com>,
Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@...pe.ca>
Cc: "Jiang, Dave" <dave.jiang@...el.com>, Vinod Koul <vkoul@...nel.org>,
Fenghua Yu <fenghuay@...dia.com>, Zhangfei Gao <zhangfei.gao@...aro.org>,
Zhou Wang <wangzhou1@...ilicon.com>,
"iommu@...ts.linux.dev" <iommu@...ts.linux.dev>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 06/12] iommu/vt-d: Cleanup
intel_context_flush_present()
On 2/25/25 15:43, Tian, Kevin wrote:
>> From: Lu Baolu<baolu.lu@...ux.intel.com>
>> Sent: Monday, February 24, 2025 1:16 PM
>>
>> The intel_context_flush_present() is called in places where either the
>> scalable mode is disabled, or scalable mode is enabled but all PASID
>> entries are known to be non-present. In these cases, the flush_domains
>> path within intel_context_flush_present() will never execute. This dead
>> code is therefore removed.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Lu Baolu<baolu.lu@...ux.intel.com>
> usually a suffix "_present()" indicates that the helper can be called
> on an object which is currently in-use, which is obviously not the
> case here.
>
> To avoid confusion probably just call it intel_context_flush() or
> intel_context_flush_no_user() is clearer.
How about intel_context_flush_no_pasid()?
Powered by blists - more mailing lists