On 8/12/2014 3:48 AM, Rob Clark wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 11, 2014 at 9:51 PM, Hiroshi Doyu <hdoyu@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> Hi Olav,
>>
>> Olav Haugan <ohaugan@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes:
>>
>>> @@ -93,6 +94,10 @@ enum iommu_attr {
>>> * @detach_dev: detach device from an iommu domain
>>> * @map: map a physically contiguous memory region to an iommu domain
>>> * @unmap: unmap a physically contiguous memory region from an iommu domain
>>> + * @map_sg: map a scatter-gather list of physically contiguous memory chunks
>>> + * to an iommu domain
>>> + * @unmap_sg: unmap a scatter-gather list of physically contiguous memory
>>> + * chunks from an iommu domain
>>> * @iova_to_phys: translate iova to physical address
>>> * @domain_has_cap: domain capabilities query
>>> * @add_device: add device to iommu grouping
>>> @@ -110,6 +115,11 @@ struct iommu_ops {
>>> phys_addr_t paddr, size_t size, int prot);
>>> size_t (*unmap)(struct iommu_domain *domain, unsigned long iova,
>>> size_t size);
>>> + int (*map_sg)(struct iommu_domain *domain, unsigned long iova,
>>> + struct scatterlist *sg, unsigned int nents, int prot,
>>> + unsigned long flags);
>>> + int (*unmap_sg)(struct iommu_domain *domain, unsigned long iova,
>>> + size_t size, unsigned long flags);
>>
>> Do you have any exmaple/explanation for the above "flags"?
>>
>> Is this going to be used for iommu global/standard attribute or SoC
>> spcific one?
>
> iirc, one plan for 'flags' was some sort of DONT_FLUSH_TLB flag for
> drivers which wanted to map/unmap N buffers with a single flush at the
> end. There might have been some other usages envisioned.
>
Yes, that was the original intent of the flags for now. I am sure we can
find other uses for this in the future.
Thanks,
Olav
--
The Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of Code Aurora Forum,
hosted by The Linux Foundation
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-arm-msm" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
