Hi Joerg,
On 2/13/18 8:29 PM, Joerg Roedel wrote:
Hi Suravee,
thanks for working on this.
On Wed, Jan 31, 2018 at 12:01:14AM -0500, Suravee Suthikulpanit wrote:
+static void amd_iommu_iotlb_range_add(struct iommu_domain *domain,
+ unsigned long iova, size_t size)
+{
+ struct amd_iommu_flush_entries *entry, *p;
+ unsigned long flags;
+ bool found = false;
+
+ spin_lock_irqsave(&amd_iommu_flush_list_lock, flags);
I am not happy with introducing or using global locks when they are not
necessary. Can this be a per-domain lock?
Besides, did you check it makes sense to actually keep track of the
ranges here? My approach would be to just make iotlb_range_add() an noop
and do a full domain flush in iotlb_sync(). But maybe you did
measurements you can share here to show there is a benefit.
Joerg
Alright, I'll send out v4 w/ iotlb_range_add() as no-op, and iotlb_sync()
as full domain flush. This should be sufficient to get start with adopting
the fast TLB flushing interface.
I'll submit support for fine-grain TLB invalidation as a separate series.
Thanks,
Suravee
