[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH 10 of 16] amd iommu: Enable FC bit in iommu host level PTE
On Tuesday 03 January 2012 11:12:35 Jan Beulich wrote: > >>> On 03.01.12 at 11:05, Wei Wang2 <wei.wang2@xxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > On Monday 02 January 2012 12:36:08 Jan Beulich wrote: > >> >>> On 23.12.11 at 12:29, Wei Wang <wei.wang2@xxxxxxx> wrote: > >> > > >> > # HG changeset patch > >> > # User Wei Wang <wei.wang2@xxxxxxx> > >> > # Date 1324569401 -3600 > >> > # Node ID 30b1f434160d989be5e0bb6c6956bb7e3985db59 > >> > # Parent dd808bdd61c581b041d5b7e816b18674de51da6f > >> > amd iommu: Enable FC bit in iommu host level PTE > >> > > >> > Signed-off-by: Wei Wang <wei.wang2@xxxxxxx> > >> > > >> > diff -r dd808bdd61c5 -r 30b1f434160d > >> > xen/drivers/passthrough/amd/iommu_map.c --- > >> > a/xen/drivers/passthrough/amd/iommu_map.c Thu Dec 22 16:56:38 2011 > >> > +0100 +++ b/xen/drivers/passthrough/amd/iommu_map.c Thu Dec 22 > >> > 16:56:41 2011 +0100 @@ -83,6 +83,11 @@ static bool_t > >> > set_iommu_pde_present(u32 set_field_in_reg_u32(ir, entry, > >> > IOMMU_PDE_IO_READ_PERMISSION_MASK, > >> > IOMMU_PDE_IO_READ_PERMISSION_SHIFT, &entry); > >> > + > >> > + /* IOMMUv2 needs FC bit enabled */ > >> > >> This comment suggests that the patches prior to that aren't consistent. > >> Is this really a proper standalone patch, or is the word "needs" too > >> strict, or should it really be moved ahead in the series? > >> > >> > + if ( next_level == IOMMU_PAGING_MODE_LEVEL_0 ) > >> > + set_field_in_reg_u32(IOMMU_CONTROL_ENABLED, entry, > >> > + IOMMU_PTE_FC_MASK, IOMMU_PTE_FC_SHIFT, > >> > &entry); > >> > >> This is being done no matter whether it actually is a v2 IOMMU that > >> you deal with here - if that's correct, the comment above should be > >> adjusted accordingly. > > > > This bit forces pci-defined no snoop bit to be cleared. This helps to > > solve potential issues in ATS devices with early drivers. I did not see > > any breaks > > > > on legacy devices and iommuv1 with FC = 1. But if you like I could make > > this > > > > only for v2 or change the comment a bit. > > Whatever is the most appropriate thing to do here (you definitely > know better than I do) I intend to keep fc =1 for both v1 and v2. This setup also aligns with Linux iommu driver. I will change the comment. Thanks, wei > Jan _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel
|
Lists.xenproject.org is hosted with RackSpace, monitoring our |