Re: [PATCH] remove fullflush and nofullflush in IOMMU generic option

[Joerg Roedel]

On Sat, Sep 20, 2008 at 05:02:16AM +0900, FUJITA Tomonori wrote:
> On Fri, 19 Sep 2008 21:52:16 +0200
> Joerg Roedel <joerg.roedel@xxxxxxx> wrote:
> 
> > On Sat, Sep 20, 2008 at 03:48:11AM +0900, FUJITA Tomonori wrote:
> > > On Fri, 19 Sep 2008 20:01:18 +0200
> > > Joerg Roedel <joerg.roedel@xxxxxxx> wrote:
> > > 
> > > > On Sat, Sep 20, 2008 at 02:40:35AM +0900, FUJITA Tomonori wrote:
> > > > > On Fri, 19 Sep 2008 19:30:04 +0200
> > > > > Joerg Roedel <joerg.roedel@xxxxxxx> wrote:
> > > > > 
> > > > > > On Sat, Sep 20, 2008 at 02:09:21AM +0900, FUJITA Tomonori wrote:
> > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > Please keep it for AMD option for now. Please send a patch to make it
> > > > > > > generic to other IOMMU people and give them a chance to discuss on
> > > > > > > it.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > Btw, you already agreed with a generic iommu= parameter for lazy IO/TLB
> > > > > > flushing"
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > 
> > > > > >  > True. We should merge common parameters across IOMMUs into the
> > > > > >  > iommu= parameter some time in the future, I think. It would also be the
> > > > > >  > place for the IOMMU size parameter.
> > > > > > 
> > > > > >  Hmm, now is better than the future? I think that now you can add
> > > > > >  something like 'disable_batching_flush' as a common parameter and
> > > > > >  change AMD IOMMU to use it.
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > in http://lkml.org/lkml/2008/9/17/376
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > And since we already have a iommu=fullflush parameter it makes sense of
> > > > > > make it generic.
> > > > > 
> > > > > I'm not against fullflush but we need to discuss it with other people
> > > > > before making the change.
> > > > 
> > > > Weird. Just 2 hours ago you wrote:
> > > > 
> > > > |http://lkml.org/lkml/2008/9/19/106
> > > > |
> > > > |For me, adding these boot parameters doesn't make sense.
> > > 
> > > See:
> > > 
> > > http://lkml.org/lkml/2008/9/19/221
> > 
> > Removing nofullflush and moving fullflush to the generic code are two
> > different questions. You talk about the first and I talk about the
> > second here. We should make sure we talk about the same things
> > when we flame each other ;)
> 
> And the root cause is that your patch does the two different things.
> 
> So please revert the changes. I've already send a patch to do
> that. Please do these things in the proper way. If you think that you
> are free to remove nofullflush from GART, send a patch to do that. If
> you think that fullflush should be generic, send a patch to do it with
> CC'ed to IOMMU people.

I don't think that there is a reason to revert the patch until
objections agains the generic iommu=fullflush come up. The patch does
not break anything and just moves the iommu=flush parameter (which is
already available) to pci-dma.c to make it useable by AMD IOMMU too.

Joerg


-- 
           |           AMD Saxony Limited Liability Company & Co. KG
 Operating |         Wilschdorfer Landstr. 101, 01109 Dresden, Germany
 System    |                  Register Court Dresden: HRA 4896
 Research  |              General Partner authorized to represent:
 Center    |             AMD Saxony LLC (Wilmington, Delaware, US)
           | General Manager of AMD Saxony LLC: Dr. Hans-R. Deppe, Thomas McCoy

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/