On 2020/8/6 下午8:29, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
On Thu, Aug 06, 2020 at 03:03:55PM +0300, Eli Cohen wrote:
On Wed, Aug 05, 2020 at 08:51:56AM -0400, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
On Wed, Jun 17, 2020 at 11:29:44AM +0800, Jason Wang wrote:
This patch introduce a config op to get valid iova range from the vDPA
device.
Signed-off-by: Jason Wang<jasowang@xxxxxxxxxx>
---
include/linux/vdpa.h | 14 ++++++++++++++
1 file changed, 14 insertions(+)
diff --git a/include/linux/vdpa.h b/include/linux/vdpa.h
index 239db794357c..b7633ed2500c 100644
--- a/include/linux/vdpa.h
+++ b/include/linux/vdpa.h
@@ -41,6 +41,16 @@ struct vdpa_device {
unsigned int index;
};
+/**
+ * vDPA IOVA range - the IOVA range support by the device
+ * @start: start of the IOVA range
+ * @end: end of the IOVA range
+ */
+struct vdpa_iova_range {
+ u64 start;
+ u64 end;
+};
+
This is ambiguous. Is end in the range or just behind it?
How about first/last?
It is customary in the kernel to use start-end where end corresponds to
the byte following the last in the range. See struct vm_area_struct
vm_start and vm_end fields
Exactly my point:
include/linux/mm_types.h: unsigned long vm_end; /* The first byte after our end address
in this case Jason wants it to be the last byte, not one behind.
Ok, I somehow recall the reason :)
See:
struct iommu_domain_geometry {
dma_addr_t aperture_start; /* First address that can be mapped */
dma_addr_t aperture_end; /* Last address that can be mapped */
bool force_aperture; /* DMA only allowed in mappable range? */
};
So what I proposed here is to be consistent with it.
Thanks
_______________________________________________
Virtualization mailing list
Virtualization@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/virtualization
