Messages in this thread | | | Date | Fri, 7 Dec 2018 10:31:58 +0100 | From | Joerg Roedel <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH 2/5] iommu/of: Use device_iommu_mapped() |
| |
On Thu, Dec 06, 2018 at 05:42:16PM +0000, Robin Murphy wrote: > For sure - although I am now wondering whether "mapped" is perhaps a little > ambiguous in the naming, since the answer to "can I use the API" is yes even > when the device may currently be attached to an identity/passthrough domain > or blocked completely, neither of which involve any "mapping". Maybe simply > "device_has_iommu()" would convey the intent better?
The name is shorter version of:
device_is_behind_an_iommu_remapping_its_dma_transactions() :)
The name is not perfect, but device_has_iommu() is not better because it might be considered as a check whether the device itself has an IOMMU built-in.
In the end an identity-mapping is also still a mapping (if the iommu needs a page-table for that is an implementation detail), as is a mapping with no page-table entries at all (blocking). So I think device_iommu_mapped() is a reasonable choice.
Regards,
Joerg
| |