On Tue, Feb 08, 2022 at 10:41:39AM +0800, Lu Baolu wrote: > On 2/8/22 7:02 AM, Fenghua Yu wrote: > > PASIDs are process wide. It was attempted to use refcounted PASIDs to > > free them when the last thread drops the refcount. This turned out to > > be complex and error prone. Given the fact that the PASID space is 20 > > bits, which allows up to 1M processes to have a PASID associated > > concurrently, PASID resource exhaustion is not a realistic concern. > > > > Therefore it was decided to simplify the approach and stick with lazy > > on demand PASID allocation, but drop the eager free approach and make > > a allocated PASID lifetime bound to the life time of the process. > > > > Get rid of the refcounting mechanisms and replace/rename the interfaces > > to reflect this new approach. > > > > Suggested-by: Dave Hansen <dave.han...@linux.intel.com> > > Signed-off-by: Fenghua Yu <fenghua...@intel.com> > > Reviewed-by: Tony Luck <tony.l...@intel.com> > > --- > > v4: > > - Update the commit message (Thomas). > > Reviewed-by: Lu Baolu <baolu...@linux.intel.com>
Thank you very much for your review, Baolu! -Fenghua _______________________________________________ iommu mailing list iommu@lists.linux-foundation.org https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/iommu
