Re: [Xen-devel] x86 swiotlb questions

["Jan Beulich" <jbeulich@xxxxxxxxxx>]

>Do we merge okay with lib/swiotlb.c then? One concern I had was with our
>preferred setup semantics -- we really want the user to be able to forcibly
>enable the swiotlb via a boot parameter *but* not have to suffer using it
>for every DMA operation. Last I looked the generic swiotlb didn't have that
>option. That and our very Xen-specific checks for whether to auto-enable the
>swiotlb led me to think that the very start-of-day setup of swiotlb would
>need to be overridable by architecture.

I think I retained all of the semantics, attached the patches as I have them
by now. This is a submission for review only, as the first four patches will
need to go to kernel.org (and hopefully will get accepted). The Xen
customization is fairly ugly, but I didn't see anything nicer than that while
also keeping the amount of changes to lib/swiotlb.c reasonable.

Patch order is
swiotlb-bugs.patch
swiotlb-bus.patch
swiotlb-cleanup.patch
swiotlb-split.patch
xen-swiotlb.patch

swiotlb-split.patch
Description: Text document

swiotlb-bus.patch
Description: Text document

swiotlb-cleanup.patch
Description: Text document

swiotlb-bugs.patch
Description: Text document

xen-swiotlb.patch
Description: Text document

_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel