Messages in this thread |  | | | Date | Thu, 21 May 2009 19:39:00 +0900 | | Subject | Re: Where do we stand with the Xen patches? | | From | FUJITA Tomonori <> |
| |
On Thu, 21 May 2009 11:28:53 +0100 Ian Campbell <ijc@hellion.org.uk> wrote:
> On Thu, 2009-05-21 at 11:27 +0100, Ian Campbell wrote: > > The corresponding the Xen updates will... > ...follow. > > Subject:swiotlb/xen: add implementation of swiotlb_range_needs_mapping hook > > This function is now implemented via asm/dma-mapping.h rather than as > a weak hook in swiotlb.c > > Signed-off-by: Ian Campbell <ian.campbell@citrix.com> > > diff --git a/arch/x86/include/asm/dma-mapping.h b/arch/x86/include/asm/dma-mapping.h > index a80139a..ed51bd1 100644 > --- a/arch/x86/include/asm/dma-mapping.h > +++ b/arch/x86/include/asm/dma-mapping.h > @@ -315,9 +315,15 @@ static inline int is_buffer_dma_capable(struct device *dev, u64 mask, > return addr + size <= mask; > } > > +#ifdef CONFIG_PCI_XEN > +extern int xen_range_needs_mapping(phys_addr_t paddr, size_t size); > +#else > +static inline int xen_range_needs_mapping(phys_addr_t paddr, size_t size) { return 0; } > +#endif
I know Xen can do something like this but you think that this is clean?
In addition, you also the similar hack in arch/ia64/include/asm/dma-mapping.h for ia64's dom0 support, I think.
IMO, your patch just moves the ugly hacks from lib/swiotlb.c to arch/{x86|ia64}/include/asm/dma-mapping.h.
|  |