On Fri, Sep 12, 2014 at 12:19:37PM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
> On Fri, 12 Sep 2014 20:47:39 +0200 Joerg Roedel wrote:
>
> > thanks for your review, I tried to answer your questions below.
>
> You'd be amazed how helpful that was ;)
>
> > Fair enough, I hope I clarified a few things with my
On Fri, 12 Sep 2014 15:21:01 -0400 Jerome Glisse wrote:
> > > I think this sumup all motivation behind this patchset and also behind
> > > my other patchset. As usual i am happy to discuss alternative way to do
> > > things but i think that the path of least disruption from current code
> > > is
On Fri, Sep 12, 2014 at 12:10:36PM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
> On Wed, 10 Sep 2014 20:02:12 -0400 Jerome Glisse wrote:
>
> > On Wed, Sep 10, 2014 at 03:01:25PM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
> > > On Tue, 9 Sep 2014 17:43:51 +0200 Joerg Roedel wrote:
> > >
> > > > here is a patch-set to extend
On Fri, 12 Sep 2014 20:47:39 +0200 Joerg Roedel wrote:
> thanks for your review, I tried to answer your questions below.
You'd be amazed how helpful that was ;)
> Fair enough, I hope I clarified a few things with my explanations
> above. I will also update the description of the patch-set when
On Wed, 10 Sep 2014 20:02:12 -0400 Jerome Glisse wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 10, 2014 at 03:01:25PM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
> > On Tue, 9 Sep 2014 17:43:51 +0200 Joerg Roedel wrote:
> >
> > > here is a patch-set to extend the mmu_notifiers in the Linux
> > > kernel to allow managing CPU external
Hi Andrew,
thanks for your review, I tried to answer your questions below.
On Wed, Sep 10, 2014 at 03:01:25PM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
> On Tue, 9 Sep 2014 17:43:51 +0200 Joerg Roedel wrote:
> > So both call-backs can't be used to safely flush any non-CPU
> > TLB because _start() is called
On Wed, Sep 10, 2014 at 08:02:12PM -0400, Jerome Glisse wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 10, 2014 at 03:01:25PM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
> > On Tue, 9 Sep 2014 17:43:51 +0200 Joerg Roedel wrote:
> >
> > > here is a patch-set to extend the mmu_notifiers in the Linux
> > > kernel to allow managing CPU
On Wed, Sep 10, 2014 at 08:02:12PM -0400, Jerome Glisse wrote:
On Wed, Sep 10, 2014 at 03:01:25PM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
On Tue, 9 Sep 2014 17:43:51 +0200 Joerg Roedel j...@8bytes.org wrote:
here is a patch-set to extend the mmu_notifiers in the Linux
kernel to allow managing CPU
Hi Andrew,
thanks for your review, I tried to answer your questions below.
On Wed, Sep 10, 2014 at 03:01:25PM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
On Tue, 9 Sep 2014 17:43:51 +0200 Joerg Roedel j...@8bytes.org wrote:
So both call-backs can't be used to safely flush any non-CPU
TLB because _start()
On Wed, 10 Sep 2014 20:02:12 -0400 Jerome Glisse j.gli...@gmail.com wrote:
On Wed, Sep 10, 2014 at 03:01:25PM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
On Tue, 9 Sep 2014 17:43:51 +0200 Joerg Roedel j...@8bytes.org wrote:
here is a patch-set to extend the mmu_notifiers in the Linux
kernel to allow
On Fri, 12 Sep 2014 20:47:39 +0200 Joerg Roedel jroe...@suse.de wrote:
thanks for your review, I tried to answer your questions below.
You'd be amazed how helpful that was ;)
Fair enough, I hope I clarified a few things with my explanations
above. I will also update the description of the
On Fri, Sep 12, 2014 at 12:10:36PM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
On Wed, 10 Sep 2014 20:02:12 -0400 Jerome Glisse j.gli...@gmail.com wrote:
On Wed, Sep 10, 2014 at 03:01:25PM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
On Tue, 9 Sep 2014 17:43:51 +0200 Joerg Roedel j...@8bytes.org wrote:
here is a
On Fri, 12 Sep 2014 15:21:01 -0400 Jerome Glisse j.gli...@gmail.com wrote:
I think this sumup all motivation behind this patchset and also behind
my other patchset. As usual i am happy to discuss alternative way to do
things but i think that the path of least disruption from current code
On Fri, Sep 12, 2014 at 12:19:37PM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
On Fri, 12 Sep 2014 20:47:39 +0200 Joerg Roedel jroe...@suse.de wrote:
thanks for your review, I tried to answer your questions below.
You'd be amazed how helpful that was ;)
Fair enough, I hope I clarified a few things
On Wed, Sep 10, 2014 at 03:01:25PM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
> On Tue, 9 Sep 2014 17:43:51 +0200 Joerg Roedel wrote:
>
> > here is a patch-set to extend the mmu_notifiers in the Linux
> > kernel to allow managing CPU external TLBs. Those TLBs may
> > be implemented in IOMMUs or any other
On Tue, 9 Sep 2014 17:43:51 +0200 Joerg Roedel wrote:
> here is a patch-set to extend the mmu_notifiers in the Linux
> kernel to allow managing CPU external TLBs. Those TLBs may
> be implemented in IOMMUs or any other external device, e.g.
> ATS/PRI capable PCI devices.
>
> The problem with
On Tue, 9 Sep 2014 17:43:51 +0200 Joerg Roedel j...@8bytes.org wrote:
here is a patch-set to extend the mmu_notifiers in the Linux
kernel to allow managing CPU external TLBs. Those TLBs may
be implemented in IOMMUs or any other external device, e.g.
ATS/PRI capable PCI devices.
The
On Wed, Sep 10, 2014 at 03:01:25PM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
On Tue, 9 Sep 2014 17:43:51 +0200 Joerg Roedel j...@8bytes.org wrote:
here is a patch-set to extend the mmu_notifiers in the Linux
kernel to allow managing CPU external TLBs. Those TLBs may
be implemented in IOMMUs or any
Changes V2->V3:
* Rebased to v3.17-rc4
* Fixed compile error because pmdp_get_and_clear_notify was
missing
Changes V1->V2:
* Rebase to v3.16-rc7
* Added call of ->invalidate_range to
__mmu_notifier_invalidate_end() so that the subsystem
doesn't need to register an ->invalidate_end()
Changes V2-V3:
* Rebased to v3.17-rc4
* Fixed compile error because pmdp_get_and_clear_notify was
missing
Changes V1-V2:
* Rebase to v3.16-rc7
* Added call of -invalidate_range to
__mmu_notifier_invalidate_end() so that the subsystem
doesn't need to register an -invalidate_end()
20 matches
Mail list logo
