On Mon, 13 Jul 2009 10:40:29 +0100 Ian Campbell <ian.campb...@eu.citrix.com> wrote:
> On Mon, 2009-07-13 at 05:20 +0100, FUJITA Tomonori wrote: > > On Fri, 10 Jul 2009 15:02:00 +0100 > > Ian Campbell <ian.campb...@citrix.com> wrote: > > > > > On Fri, 2009-07-10 at 14:35 +0900, FUJITA Tomonori wrote: > > > > I don't think that we need to take account of dom0 support; we don't > > > > have a clear idea about an acceptable dom0 design (it needs to use > > > > swiotlb code? I don't know yet), we don't even know we will have dom0 > > > > support in mainline. That's why I didn't CC this patchset to Xen > > > > camp. > > > > > > The core domain 0 patches which were the subject of the discussions a > > > few week back are completely orthogonal to the swiotlb side of things > > > > ? If we don't merge dom0 patch, we don't need dom0 changes to > > swiotlb. We don't know we would have dom0 support in mainline. Or I > > overlooked something? > [...] > > As far as I know, you have not posted anything about changes to > > swiotlb for domU. I can't discuss it. If you want, please send > > patches. > > There are no separate domU swiotlb patches -- the exact the same patches > as we have already been discussing are useful and necessary for both > domU and dom0. Hmm, you guys introduced the swiotlb hooks by saying that it's for only dom0. = http://lkml.org/lkml/2008/12/16/351 Hi Ingo, Here's some patches to clean up swiotlb to prepare for some Xen dom0 patches. These have been posted before, but undergone a round of cleanups to address various comments. = I don't see any comments like 'this is useful to dom0 too'. I'm still not sure what exactly part is useful to domU. _______________________________________________ Linuxppc-dev mailing list Linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org https://lists.ozlabs.org/listinfo/linuxppc-dev
