On Sun, 2015-04-05 at 07:49 -0400, Sowmini Varadhan wrote:
> + if (likely(pass == 0)) {
> + /* First failure, rescan from the beginning.
> */
> + pool->hint = pool->start;
> + set_flush(iommu);
> + pass++;
> + goto again;
> + } else if (!largealloc && pass <= iommu->nr_pools) {
> + spin_unlock(&(pool->lock));
> + pool_nr = (pool_nr + 1) & (iommu->nr_pools -
> 1);
> + pool = &(iommu->pools[pool_nr]);
> + spin_lock(&(pool->lock));
> + pool->hint = pool->start;
> + set_flush(iommu);
> + pass++;
> + goto again;
So you decided to keep the logic here that updates the hint instead of
just getting rid of need_flush alltogether ?
Out of curiosity, what's the rationale ? Did you find a reason why
resetting the hint in those two cases (rather than just setting "start"
appropriately) is actually useful ?
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
