lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2018]   [Sep]   [7]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
SubjectRe: [PATCH v2 02/12] iommu/vt-d: Manage scalalble mode PASID tables
From
Date
Hi,

On 09/07/2018 07:43 AM, Jacob Pan wrote:
> On Thu, 6 Sep 2018 10:46:03 +0800
> Lu Baolu <baolu.lu@linux.intel.com> wrote:
>
>>>> @@ -224,7 +271,14 @@ struct pasid_entry
>>>> *intel_pasid_get_entry(struct device *dev, int pasid)
>>>> */
>>>> static inline void pasid_clear_entry(struct pasid_entry *pe)
>>>> {
>>>> - WRITE_ONCE(pe->val, 0);
>>>> + WRITE_ONCE(pe->val[0], 0);
>>>> + WRITE_ONCE(pe->val[1], 0);
>>>> + WRITE_ONCE(pe->val[2], 0);
>>>> + WRITE_ONCE(pe->val[3], 0);
>>>> + WRITE_ONCE(pe->val[4], 0);
>>>> + WRITE_ONCE(pe->val[5], 0);
>>>> + WRITE_ONCE(pe->val[6], 0);
>>>> + WRITE_ONCE(pe->val[7], 0);
>>>
>>> memset?
>>
>> The order is important here. Otherwise, the PRESENT bit of this pasid
>> entry might still set while other fields contains invalid values.
>
> WRITE_ONCE/READ_ONCE will switch to __builtin_memcpy() in if the size
> exceeds word size, ie. 64bit in this case. I don;t think compiler will
> reorder built-in function. Beside, we only need to clear present and
> FDP bit, right?

Clear present and FDP bit is enough for hardare. But from software point
of view, it's better to clear all bits with 0.

Best regards,
Lu Baolu

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2018-09-07 03:59    [W:0.064 / U:0.156 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site