On 2023/12/7 02:50, Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
On Wed, Dec 06, 2023 at 10:43:34AM -0800, Nicolin Chen wrote:
On Wed, Dec 06, 2023 at 02:32:09PM -0400, Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
On Fri, Nov 17, 2023 at 05:07:12AM -0800, Yi Liu wrote:
@@ -465,6 +492,9 @@ struct iommu_domain_ops {
size_t size);
void (*iotlb_sync)(struct iommu_domain *domain,
struct iommu_iotlb_gather *iotlb_gather);
+ int (*cache_invalidate_user)(struct iommu_domain *domain,
+ struct iommu_user_data_array *array,
+ u32 *error_code);
Regarding the other conversation I worry a u32 error_code is too small.
Unfortunately there is no obvious place to put something better so if
we reach it we will have to add more error_code space via normal
extension.
Maybe expand this to u64? That is 64 bits of error register data and
the consumer index. It should do for SMMUv3 at least?
I think Yi is moving the error_code to the entry data structure,
where we can even define a list of error_codes as a driver data
needs. So, I assume this u32 pointer would be gone too.
Oh, lets see that then..
yes, I'm going to move it.
--
Regards,
Yi Liu
