On 07/08/2013 05:20 PM, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote: > On Mon, 2013-07-08 at 14:44 +1000, Alexey Kardashevskiy wrote: > >> diff --git a/arch/powerpc/platforms/powernv/pci.h >> b/arch/powerpc/platforms/powernv/pci.h >> index 25d76c4..7ea82c1 100644 >> --- a/arch/powerpc/platforms/powernv/pci.h >> +++ b/arch/powerpc/platforms/powernv/pci.h >> @@ -52,6 +52,7 @@ struct pnv_ioda_pe { >> int tce32_seg; >> int tce32_segcount; >> struct iommu_table tce32_table; >> + phys_addr_t it_index_rm; > > Please .... > > The fact that we hijack the it_index field of the iommu table > for the virtual address is bad enough, but really don't need > to perpetuate this :-) > > Call the field something decent such as "tce_inval_reg_phys"
Yes we can. I just find it veeeeeeery attractive when I can grep "\<it_" and get all users of iommu_table. btw is phys_addr_t correct here? -- Alexey -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/