Messages in this thread | | | From | "Tian, Kevin" <> | Subject | RE: [PATCH v10 3/7] iommu/vt-d: Add domain_flush_pasid_iotlb() | Date | Fri, 14 Jul 2023 03:51:16 +0000 |
| |
> From: Baolu Lu <baolu.lu@linux.intel.com> > Sent: Friday, July 14, 2023 11:37 AM > > On 2023/7/13 15:52, Tian, Kevin wrote: > >> From: Jacob Pan <jacob.jun.pan@linux.intel.com> > >> Sent: Thursday, July 13, 2023 12:34 AM > >> +static void domain_flush_pasid_iotlb(struct intel_iommu *iommu, > >> + struct dmar_domain *domain, u64 addr, > >> + unsigned long npages, bool ih) > >> +{ > >> + u16 did = domain_id_iommu(domain, iommu); > >> + unsigned long flags; > >> + > >> + spin_lock_irqsave(&domain->lock, flags); > >> + if (!list_empty(&domain->devices)) > >> + qi_flush_piotlb(iommu, did, IOMMU_NO_PASID, addr, > >> npages, ih); > >> + spin_unlock_irqrestore(&domain->lock, flags); > > > > btw I gave a comment before that the check of list_empty() changes > > the semantics instead of just creating a helper. > > > > If it's the right thing to do please split it into a separate fix patch. > > Perhaps move it into patch 6? >
I still prefer to putting it in a separate patch since it changes the behavior in existing path. It's not really about dev_pasid which patch6 is trying to support.
| |