Messages in this thread | | | Date | Sat, 13 Oct 2012 20:52:57 +0800 | Subject | Re: [PATCH v2 1/7] swiotlb: Make io_tlb_end a physical address instead of a virtual one | From | Hillf Danton <> |
| |
Hi Alexander,
On Fri, Oct 12, 2012 at 4:34 AM, Alexander Duyck <alexander.h.duyck@intel.com> wrote: > This change replaces all references to the virtual address for io_tlb_end > with references to the physical address io_tlb_end. The main advantage of > replacing the virtual address with a physical address is that we can avoid > having to do multiple translations from the virtual address to the physical > one needed for testing an existing DMA address. > > Signed-off-by: Alexander Duyck <alexander.h.duyck@intel.com> > --- > > lib/swiotlb.c | 24 +++++++++++++----------- > 1 files changed, 13 insertions(+), 11 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/lib/swiotlb.c b/lib/swiotlb.c > index f114bf6..19aac9f 100644 > --- a/lib/swiotlb.c > +++ b/lib/swiotlb.c > @@ -57,7 +57,8 @@ int swiotlb_force; > * swiotlb_tbl_sync_single_*, to see if the memory was in fact allocated by this > * API. > */ > -static char *io_tlb_start, *io_tlb_end; > +static char *io_tlb_start; > +phys_addr_t io_tlb_end;
If add io_tlb_start_phy and io_tlb_end_phy, could we get same results with less hunks?
Hillf
| |