On Wed, Dec 9, 2020 at 12:12 PM Jerry Snitselaar <jsnit...@redhat.com> wrote: > > > Will Deacon @ 2020-12-09 11:50 MST: > > > On Wed, Dec 09, 2020 at 10:07:46AM -0800, Linus Torvalds wrote: > >> On Wed, Dec 9, 2020 at 6:12 AM Will Deacon <w...@kernel.org> wrote: > >> > > >> > Please pull this one-liner AMD IOMMU fix for 5.10. It's actually a fix > >> > for a fix, where the size of the interrupt remapping table was increased > >> > but a related constant for the size of the interrupt table was forgotten. > >> > >> Pulled. > > > > Thanks. > > > >> However, why didn't this then add some sanity checking for the two > >> different #defines to be in sync? > >> > >> IOW, something like > >> > >> #define AMD_IOMMU_IRQ_TABLE_SHIFT 9 > >> > >> #define MAX_IRQS_PER_TABLE (1 << AMD_IOMMU_IRQ_TABLE_SHIFT) > >> #define DTE_IRQ_TABLE_LEN ((u64)AMD_IOMMU_IRQ_TABLE_SHIFT << 1) > > Since the field in the device table entry format expects it to be n > where there are 2^n entries in the table I guess it should be: > > #define DTE_IRQ_TABLE_LEN 9 > #define MAX_IRQS_PER_TABLE (1 << DTE_IRQ_TABLE_LEN) > No, ignore that. I'm being stupid.
> >> > >> or whatever. Hmm? > > > > This looks like a worthwhile change to me, but I don't have any hardware > > so I've been very reluctant to make even "obvious" driver changes here. > > > > Suravee -- please can you post a patch implementing the above? > > > >> That way this won't happen again, but perhaps equally importantly the > >> linkage will be more clear, and there won't be those random constants. > >> > >> Naming above is probably garbage - I assume there's some actual > >> architectural name for that irq table length field in the DTE? > > > > The one in the spec is even better: "IntTabLen". > > > > Will > > _______________________________________________ > > iommu mailing list > > io...@lists.linux-foundation.org > > https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/iommu >
