15/01/2018 13:22, Jonas Pfefferle:
>
> On Sat, 13 Jan 2018 23:49:30 +0100
> Thomas Monjalon <tho...@monjalon.net> wrote:
> > 13/01/2018 13:15, Burakov, Anatoly:
> >> On 11-Jan-18 11:45 PM, Thomas Monjalon wrote:
> >> > 07/11/2017 10:50, Jonas Pfefferle1:
> >> >>> Is there something urgent for 17.11?
> >> >>> Or can it be refined in 18.02?
> >> >>
> >> >> Nothing urgent. We can refine this for 18.02.
> >> >>
> >> >>> Anatoly, any thought?
> >> >
> >> > Anatoly, Jonas, how do you want to proceed with this patch?
> >> >
> >>
> >> I don't see anything to be refined here, it's a simple bug fix -
> >>code
> >> assumes noiommu mode support is always available, when it might not
> >>be
> >> the case on older kernels.
> >
> > As a bug fix, the title must start with "fix" and a tag "Fixes:"
> > must be added to help with backport.
> > At the same time, the explanation of the bug must be added in
> > the commit log please.
> >
> > Thanks
>
> It's not really a bug fix since it does not change the semantic of the
> function but just adds nicer error handling.
> Regarding redefining the code: What I don't like is the special cases
> we have to check for when using the sPAPR iommu because it does not
> support VA mappings yet. I think we should decide which iova mode to
> use based on the iommu types available, i.e. each iommu type should
> report which iova type it supports. Thoughts?
Have you looked at what Maxime did?
https://dpdk.org/dev/patchwork/patch/33650/
How does it affect this patch?
