On 2018-01-19 05:27, Jean-Philippe Brucker wrote:
Hi Sinan,
On 19/01/18 04:52, Sinan Kaya wrote:
Hi Jean-Philippe,
On 10/6/2017 9:31 AM, Jean-Philippe Brucker wrote:
/**
+ * iommu_process_bind_device - Bind a process address space to a
device
+ * @dev: the device
+ * @task: the process to
Hi Sinan,
On 19/01/18 04:52, Sinan Kaya wrote:
> Hi Jean-Philippe,
>
> On 10/6/2017 9:31 AM, Jean-Philippe Brucker wrote:
>> /**
>> + * iommu_process_bind_device - Bind a process address space to a device
>> + * @dev: the device
>> + * @task: the process to bind
>> + * @pasid: valid address wher
Hi Jean-Philippe,
On 10/6/2017 9:31 AM, Jean-Philippe Brucker wrote:
> /**
> + * iommu_process_bind_device - Bind a process address space to a device
> + * @dev: the device
> + * @task: the process to bind
> + * @pasid: valid address where the PASID will be stored
> + * @flags: bond properties (I
On 30/11/17 01:11, Yisheng Xie wrote:
> Hi, Jean,
>
> On 2017/11/29 23:01, Jean-Philippe Brucker wrote:
>> On 29/11/17 06:08, Yisheng Xie wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> On 2017/10/6 21:31, Jean-Philippe Brucker wrote:
+int iommu_process_bind_device(struct device *dev, struct task_struct
*task,
Hi, Jean,
On 2017/11/29 23:01, Jean-Philippe Brucker wrote:
> On 29/11/17 06:08, Yisheng Xie wrote:
>>
>>
>> On 2017/10/6 21:31, Jean-Philippe Brucker wrote:
>>> +int iommu_process_bind_device(struct device *dev, struct task_struct *task,
>>> + int *pasid, int flags)
>>> +{
On 29/11/17 06:08, Yisheng Xie wrote:
>
>
> On 2017/10/6 21:31, Jean-Philippe Brucker wrote:
>> +int iommu_process_bind_device(struct device *dev, struct task_struct *task,
>> + int *pasid, int flags)
>> +{
> [..]
>> +err = iommu_process_attach_locked(
On 2017/10/6 21:31, Jean-Philippe Brucker wrote:
> +int iommu_process_bind_device(struct device *dev, struct task_struct *task,
> + int *pasid, int flags)
> +{
[..]
> + err = iommu_process_attach_locked(context, dev);
> + if (err)
On 21/10/17 16:47, Sinan Kaya wrote:
> Just some improvement suggestions.
>
> On 10/6/2017 9:31 AM, Jean-Philippe Brucker wrote:
>> +spin_lock(&iommu_process_lock);
>> +idr_for_each_entry(&iommu_process_idr, process, i) {
>> +if (process->pid != pid)
>> +con
Just some improvement suggestions.
On 10/6/2017 9:31 AM, Jean-Philippe Brucker wrote:
> + spin_lock(&iommu_process_lock);
> + idr_for_each_entry(&iommu_process_idr, process, i) {
> + if (process->pid != pid)
> + continue;
if you see this construct a lot, thi
Hi Jean-Philippe,
On Thu, Oct 12, 2017 at 12:13:20PM +0100, Jean-Philippe Brucker wrote:
> On 11/10/17 12:33, Joerg Roedel wrote:
> > Here is how I think the base API should look like:
> >
> > * iommu_iovm_device_init(struct device *dev);
> > iommu_iovm_device_shutdown(struct device *de
Hi Joerg,
On 11/10/17 12:33, Joerg Roedel wrote:
> Hi Jean-Philipe,
>
> Thanks for your patches, this is definitly a step in the right direction
> to get generic support for IO virtual memory into the IOMMU core code.
>
> But I see an issue with the design around task_struct, please see
> below.
Hi Jean-Philipe,
Thanks for your patches, this is definitly a step in the right direction
to get generic support for IO virtual memory into the IOMMU core code.
But I see an issue with the design around task_struct, please see
below.
On Fri, Oct 06, 2017 at 02:31:32PM +0100, Jean-Philippe Brucke
Add bind and unbind operations to the IOMMU API. Device drivers can use
them to share process page tables with their device.
iommu_process_bind_group is provided for VFIO's convenience, as it needs
to provide a coherent interface on containers. Device drivers will most
likely want to use iommu_proc
13 matches
Mail list logo
