On 4/24/25 21:35, John Levon wrote:
On Thu, Apr 24, 2025 at 07:16:52PM +0200, Cédric Le Goater wrote:
Having said that I'm OK with going back to just a simple boolean if you'd really
prefer.
yes. VFIO_DMA_UNMAP_FLAG_ALL is a kernel interface and we don't
need more than one flag today.
OK
On Thu, Apr 24, 2025 at 07:16:52PM +0200, Cédric Le Goater wrote:
> > Having said that I'm OK with going back to just a simple boolean if you'd
> > really
> > prefer.
>
> yes. VFIO_DMA_UNMAP_FLAG_ALL is a kernel interface and we don't
> need more than one flag today.
OK
> > > Why not unmap the
On 4/23/25 19:17, John Levon wrote:
On Wed, Apr 23, 2025 at 07:01:23PM +0200, Cédric Le Goater wrote:
On 4/9/25 15:48, John Levon wrote:
Use the new flags parameter to indicate when we want to unmap
everything; no functional change is intended.
I find these changes confusing. Most likely the
On 4/9/25 15:48, John Levon wrote:
Use the new flags parameter to indicate when we want to unmap
everything; no functional change is intended.
I find these changes confusing. Most likely there are not well presented
or I am missing something. Some more below.
Signed-off-by: John Levon
---
On Wed, Apr 23, 2025 at 07:01:23PM +0200, Cédric Le Goater wrote:
> On 4/9/25 15:48, John Levon wrote:
> > Use the new flags parameter to indicate when we want to unmap
> > everything; no functional change is intended.
>
> I find these changes confusing. Most likely there are not well presented
>
Use the new flags parameter to indicate when we want to unmap
everything; no functional change is intended.
Signed-off-by: John Levon
---
hw/vfio/container.c | 49 -
hw/vfio/iommufd.c | 19 +-
hw/vfio/listener.c | 19 ++--
