On Fri, Mar 20, 2009 at 07:15:51PM +0800, David Woodhouse wrote:
> On Fri, 2009-03-20 at 10:47 +0800, Zhao, Yu wrote:
> > If it's possible, I'd like it go through the PCI tree because the ATS
> > depends on the SR-IOV. This dependency is not reflected in this v3
> > series since the SR-IOV is not in-tree and I don't want to break the
> > build after people apply the ATS on their tree.
>
> In what way will it depend on SR-IOV?
The SR-IOV spec section 3.7.4 says that the Smallest Translation Unit and
the Invalidate Queue Depth fields in the Virtual Function's ATS capability
are hard-wired to 0. So we need some special handling when enabling the ATS
capability for the Virtual Function.
Table 3-26: ATS Capability Register
-------------+-----------------------------------------+---------------+--------------
Bit Location | PF and VF Register Differences From ATS | PF Attributes | VF Attributes
-------------+-----------------------------------------+---------------+--------------
| Smallest Translation Unit (STU) | |
20:16 | Hardwired to 0 for VFs. | ATS | RO
| PF value applies to all VFs. | |
-------------+-----------------------------------------+---------------+--------------
| Invalidate Queue Depth | |
28:24 | Hardwired to 0 for VFs. | ATS | RO
| Depth of shared PF input queue. | |
-------------+-----------------------------------------+---------------+--------------
> > So Dave, can I get an ack from you and let Jesse pull the IOMMU change
> > to his tree? Or let this ATS go to 2.6.31?
>
> Want to show the latest version of the patches which depend on SR-IOV,
> and I can ack them?
Sure, thanks!
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-pci" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
