|
[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 |