Hi Joerg, Thanks for your reviewing!
On 08/04/17 at 02:09pm, Joerg Roedel wrote: > Hi Baoquan, > > On Tue, Aug 01, 2017 at 07:37:21PM +0800, Baoquan He wrote: > > + for_each_iommu(iommu) { > > + /* All IOMMUs should use the same device table with the same > > size */ > > + lo = readl(iommu->mmio_base + MMIO_DEV_TABLE_OFFSET); > > + hi = readl(iommu->mmio_base + MMIO_DEV_TABLE_OFFSET + 4); > > + entry = (((u64) hi) << 32) + lo; > > + if (last_entry && last_entry != entry) { > > + pr_err("IOMMU:%d should use the same dev table as > > others!/n", > > + iommu->index); > > + return -1; > > + } > > + last_entry = entry; > > + > > + old_devtb_size = ((entry & ~PAGE_MASK) + 1) << 12; > > + if (old_devtb_size != dev_table_size) { > > + pr_err("The device table size of IOMMU:%d is not > > expected!/n", > > + iommu->index); > > + return -1; > > + } > > + > > + if (copied) > > + continue; > > + > > + old_devtb_phys = entry & PAGE_MASK; > > + old_devtb = memremap(old_devtb_phys, dev_table_size, > > MEMREMAP_WB); > > + if (!old_devtb) > > + return -1; > > You forgot to check whether the old device table is also below 4GB. I did it in patch 10/13. I think it's an sub-issue and can be explained in a specific patch. Thanks Baoquan _______________________________________________ iommu mailing list iommu@lists.linux-foundation.org https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/iommu