On Tue, Jul 06, 2021 at 04:05:13PM +0200, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > On Tue, Jul 06, 2021 at 03:01:04PM +0100, Robin Murphy wrote: > > FWIW I was pondering the question of whether to do something along those > > lines or just scrap the default assignment entirely, so since I hadn't got > > round to saying that I've gone ahead and hacked up the alternative > > (similarly untested) for comparison :) > > > > TBH I'm still not sure which one I prefer... > > Claire did implement something like your suggestion originally, but > I don't really like it as it doesn't scale for adding multiple global > pools, e.g. for the 64-bit addressable one for the various encrypted > secure guest schemes. Couple of things: - I am not pushing to Linus the Claire's patchset until we have a resolution on this. I hope you all agree that is a sensible way forward as much as I hate doing that. - I like Robin's fix as it is simplest looking. Would love to see if it does fix the problem. - Christopher - we can always add multiple pools as the next milestone and just focus on this feature getting tested extensively during this release. - Would it be worth (for future or maybe in another tiny fix) to also add a printk in swiotlb when we de-allocate the buffer so when someone looks through the `dmesg` it becomes much easier to diagnose issues?
