Re: [PATCH RFC v1 4/7] swiotlb: to implement io_tlb_high_mem

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



Hi Christoph,

On 6/8/22 10:05 PM, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> All this really needs to be hidden under the hood.
> 

Since this patch file has 200+ lines, would you please help clarify what does
'this' indicate?

The idea of this patch:

1. Convert the functions to initialize swiotlb into callee. The callee accepts
'true' or 'false' as arguments to indicate whether it is for default or new
swiotlb buffer, e.g., swiotlb_init_remap() into __swiotlb_init_remap().

2. At the caller side to decide if we are going to call the callee to create the
extra buffer.

Do you mean the callee if still *too high level* and all the
decision/allocation/initialization should be down at *lower level functions*?

E.g., if I re-work the "struct io_tlb_mem" to make the 64-bit buffer as the 2nd
array of io_tlb_mem->slots[32_or_64][index], the user will only notice it is the
default 'io_tlb_default_mem', but will not be able to know if it is allocated
from 32-bit or 64-bit buffer.

Thank you very much for the feedback.

Dongli Zhang
_______________________________________________
Virtualization mailing list
Virtualization@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/virtualization



[Index of Archives]     [KVM Development]     [Libvirt Development]     [Libvirt Users]     [CentOS Virtualization]     [Netdev]     [Ethernet Bridging]     [Linux Wireless]     [Kernel Newbies]     [Security]     [Linux for Hams]     [Netfilter]     [Bugtraq]     [Yosemite Forum]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux RAID]     [Linux Admin]     [Samba]

  Powered by Linux