10/07/2017 15:56, santosh: > On Monday 10 July 2017 07:21 PM, Thomas Monjalon wrote: > > > 10/07/2017 15:30, santosh: > >> Hi Olivier, > >> > >> On Monday 10 July 2017 05:57 PM, Olivier Matz wrote: > >>> I didn't check the patchset in detail, but in my understanding, > >>> what we call physaddr in dpdk is actually a bus address. Shouldn't > >>> we start to rename some of these fields and functions to avoid > >>> confusion? > >> Agree. > >> While working on iova mode thing and reading these vir2phy api - > >> confused me more. Actually it should be iova2va, va2iova or > >> pa2iova,iova2pa.. > >> where iova address is nothing but bus address Or we should refer to linux > >> semantics. > >> > >> We thought of addressing semantics after this series, Not a priority in > >> IMO. > > I think it is a priority to start with semantics. > > The work is too hard with wrong semantic otherwise. > > Sorry, I don;t agree with you. Semantic shouldn't lower the iova priority. > iova framework is blocking SoC's. w/o iova framework : One has to live with > hackish solution for their SoC. > > Semantic change in any-case could be pipelined. It shouldn't be like > Semantics change gets priority and therefore it blocks other SoCs.
I am not saying it is blocking. I just say that you have not started your work by the beginning, and now it make reviews difficult (from what I understand). You must make all the efforts to make your patches easier to understand and accept.
