Messages in this thread | | | Date | Thu, 26 Jun 2014 12:37:29 +0200 | From | Alexander Graf <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH 0/3] Prepare for in-kernel VFIO DMA operations acceleration |
| |
On 26.06.14 01:59, Alexey Kardashevskiy wrote: > On 06/26/2014 07:12 AM, Alexander Graf wrote: >> On 06.06.14 02:20, Alexey Kardashevskiy wrote: >>> On 06/05/2014 09:57 PM, Alexander Graf wrote: >>>> On 05.06.14 09:25, Alexey Kardashevskiy wrote: >>>>> This reserves 2 capability numbers. >>>>> >>>>> This implements an extended version of KVM_CREATE_SPAPR_TCE_64 ioctl. >>>>> >>>>> Please advise how to proceed with these patches as I suspect that >>>>> first two should go via Paolo's tree while the last one via Alex Graf's >>>>> tree >>>>> (correct?). >>>> They would just go via my tree, but only be actually allocated (read: >>>> mergable to qemu) when they hit Paolo's tree. >>>> >>>> In fact, I don't think it makes sense to split them off at all. >>> So? Are these patches going anywhere? Thanks. >> So? Are you going to address the comments? > Sorry, I cannot find here anything to fix. Ben asked some questions, I > answered and there were no objections. What do I miss this time?...
> >> In fact, the code as is today can allocate an arbitrary amount of pinned > >> kernel memory from within user space without any checks. > > > > Right. We should at least account it in the locked limit. > > Yup. And (probably) this thing will keep a counter of how many windows were > created per KVM instance to avoid having multiple copies of the same table.
Alex
| |