[lkml]   [2017]   [Oct]   [12]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: [PATCH v2 03/16] iommu: introduce iommu invalidate API function
On 2017/10/11 20:48, Jean-Philippe Brucker wrote:
> On 11/10/17 13:15, Joerg Roedel wrote:
>> On Wed, Oct 11, 2017 at 11:54:52AM +0000, Liu, Yi L wrote:
>>> I didn't quite get 'iovm' mean. Can you explain a bit about the idea?
>> It's short for IO Virtual Memory, basically a replacement term for 'svm'
>> that is not ambiguous (afaik) and not specific to Intel.
> I wonder if SVM originated in OpenCL first, rather than intel? That's why
> I'm using it, but it is ambiguous. I'm not sure IOVM is precise enough
> though, since the name could as well be used without shared tables, for
> classical map/unmap and IOVAs. Kevin Tian suggested SVA "Shared Virtual
> Addressing" last time, which is a little more clear than SVM and isn't
> used elsewhere in the kernel either.

The process "vaddr" can be the same as "IOVA" by using the classical map/unmap way.
This is also a kind of share virtual memory/address(except have to pin physical memory).
How to distinguish these two different implementation of "share virtual memory/address"?


 \ /
  Last update: 2017-10-12 11:49    [W:0.080 / U:0.644 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site