lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2017]   [Oct]   [11]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH v2 03/16] iommu: introduce iommu invalidate API function
On Wed, Oct 11, 2017 at 07:54:32AM +0000, Liu, Yi L wrote:
> I agree that iommu_invalidate() is too generic. Additionally, also
> better to avoid making it svm specific.

I also don't like to name the functions after the Intel feature, but I
failed to come up with a better alternative so far. The only one I can
come up with for now would be 'iovm', so the function name would be
iommu_iovm_invalidate().

On the other side, the ARM guys also already call the feature set
'SVM', despite it being ambiguous and Intel specific. I don't have a
strong opinion on the naming.

> The reason we introduce this API is in vSVM case is that guest owns
> the first level page table(vtd). If we use similar mechanism for
> vIOVA, then we also need to passdown guest's vIOVA tlb flush.
>
> Since it is to expose an API for iommu tlb flushes requests from
> userspace/guest which is out of iommu. How about naming it as
> iommu_tlb_external_invalidate()?

If you only read the function name, 'external' could mean everything. It
is not clear from the name when to use this function. So something like
iommu_iovm_invalidate() is better.


Joerg

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2017-10-11 11:53    [W:0.120 / U:0.636 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site