[lkml]   [2018]   [Jul]   [11]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: [PATCH v4 1/9] iommu/vt-d: Global PASID name space
Hi Peter,

Thanks for looking into my patches.

On 07/11/2018 10:48 AM, Peter Xu wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 09, 2018 at 01:22:50PM +0800, Lu Baolu wrote:
> [...]
>> +#ifndef __INTEL_PASID_H
>> +#define __INTEL_PASID_H
>> +
>> +#define PASID_MIN 0x1
>> +#define PASID_MAX 0x20000
> Could I ask whether there's a reason to explicitly use 0x20000 for the
> max value? Asked since I saw that the example in the spec gave 20
> bits for PASID (please refer to spec ver 3.0 section 3.4.3 figure
> 3-8). Also I believe that's what I was told by Kevin.
> I saw that the old per-iommu max value is set to 0x20000, though I'm
> not sure whether that's still needed since if we're going to have
> two-level pasid table then AFAIU we don't need physically continuous
> memory any more (though I saw that we don't yet have two-level pasid
> table implemented):
> /* Eventually I'm promised we will get a multi-level PASID table
> * and it won't have to be physically contiguous. Until then,
> * limit the size because 8MiB contiguous allocations can be hard
> * to come by. The limit of 0x20000, which is 1MiB for each of
> * the PASID and PASID-state tables, is somewhat arbitrary. */
> if (iommu->pasid_max > 0x20000)
> iommu->pasid_max = 0x20000;

You are right.

With the scalable mode defined in vt-d v3.0, wecould use the full 20 bit
pasid. Previous max pasid was intended to save contiguous physical memory.

Best regards,
Lu Baolu

 \ /
  Last update: 2018-07-11 08:34    [W:0.037 / U:2.252 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site