On Sun, 2015-03-22 at 18:07 -0400, Sowmini Varadhan wrote: > On (03/23/15 09:02), Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote: > > > How does this relate to the ARM implementation? There is currently > > > an effort going on to make that one shared with ARM64 and possibly > > > x86. Has anyone looked at both the PowerPC and ARM ways of doing the > > > allocation to see if we could pick one of the two to work on > > > all architectures? > > > > What I see in ARM is horribly complex, I can't quite make sense of it > > in a couple of minutes of looking at it, and doesn't seem to address the > > basic issue we are addressing here which is the splitting of the iommu > > table lock. > > Amen to that.. I thought it was just me :-) > > I plan to go through the code to see if/where the armd iommu code > does its locking and achieves its parallelism, but the mapping > between the sparc/powerpc approach and armd is not immediately obvious > to me. We might have more chance with x86_64 though... They would surely have similar scalability issues. Cheers, Ben. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe sparclinux" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
