[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH v2 10/15] xen/passthrough: iommu: Basic support of device tree assignment
>>> On 23.02.14 at 23:16, Julien Grall <julien.grall@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > Add IOMMU helpers to support device tree assignment/deassignment. This patch > introduces 2 new fields in the dt_device_node: > - is_protected: Does the device is protected by an IOMMU > - next_assigned: Pointer to the next device assigned to the same > domain > > Signed-off-by: Julien Grall <julien.grall@xxxxxxxxxx> > > --- > Changes in v2: > - Patch added > --- > xen/common/device_tree.c | 4 ++ > xen/drivers/passthrough/Makefile | 1 + > xen/drivers/passthrough/device_tree.c | 106 > +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ > xen/drivers/passthrough/iommu.c | 10 ++++ > xen/include/xen/device_tree.h | 14 +++++ > xen/include/xen/hvm/iommu.h | 6 ++ > xen/include/xen/iommu.h | 16 +++++ No matter how small the changes to generic IOMMU code, you should Cc the maintainers. > --- a/xen/drivers/passthrough/iommu.c > +++ b/xen/drivers/passthrough/iommu.c > @@ -123,6 +123,12 @@ int iommu_domain_init(struct domain *d) > if ( ret ) > return ret; > > +#if HAS_DEVICE_TREE > + ret = iommu_dt_domain_init(d); > + if ( ret ) > + return ret; > +#endif Why can this not be part of arch_iommu_domain_init()? > @@ -198,6 +204,10 @@ void iommu_domain_destroy(struct domain *d) > if ( need_iommu(d) ) > iommu_teardown(d); > > +#ifdef HAS_DEVICE_TREE > + iommu_dt_domain_destroy(d); > +#endif > + > arch_iommu_domain_destroy(d); And the former one here part of the latter? > @@ -28,6 +29,11 @@ struct hvm_iommu { > > /* iommu_ops */ > const struct iommu_ops *platform_ops; > + > + #ifdef HAS_DEVICE_TREE > + /* List of DT devices assigned to this domain */ > + struct list_head dt_devices; > + #endif Indentation. Jan _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel
|
Lists.xenproject.org is hosted with RackSpace, monitoring our |