Re: [PATCH 9/9] x86: Detect whether we should use Xen SWIOTLB.

[FUJITA Tomonori]

On Mon, 02 Aug 2010 08:30:38 -0700
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> On 08/02/2010 08:25 AM, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk wrote:
> > hpa, are your concerns that a) inserting a sub-system call in the
> > generic code is not good. Or b) that we have five IOMMUs (counting SWIOTLB in that
> > category) and that we don't jettison from memory the ones we don't need
> > (that would be the primary goal of driverization of those IOMMUs,
> > right?). Or c) we should remove all sub-system detect calls (Calgary, AMD,
> > Intel, AGP) altogether from pci-dma.c and depend more on
> > x86_init.iommu structure (perhaps expend it?)
> 
> Sorry, had to deal with other stuff.
> 
> Basically, a) and c) are the issues, with a) being the more immediate;
> the amount of code left in memory is relatively small and as such I'm
> not too concerned with that aspect specifically.
> 
> With five IOMMUs we're well past the point where we need to have a clean
> and generic interface instead of having everything be ad hoc and
> interdependent.

That's the difficult part because IOMMUs are not
interdependent. Hardware IOMMUs are related with swiotlb. GART and
AMD-IOMMU are too.

We could invent sorta IOMMU register interface and driver-ize IOMMUs
but they can't be interdependent completely.
--
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/