Hi Thomas,
On 26/07/2016 11:00, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> B1;2802;0cEric,
>
> On Mon, 25 Jul 2016, Auger Eric wrote:
>> On 20/07/2016 11:04, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
>>> On Tue, 19 Jul 2016, Eric Auger wrote:
+ if (ret) {
+ for (; i >= 0; i--) {
+
B1;2802;0cEric,
On Mon, 25 Jul 2016, Auger Eric wrote:
> On 20/07/2016 11:04, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> > On Tue, 19 Jul 2016, Eric Auger wrote:
> >> + if (ret) {
> >> + for (; i >= 0; i--) {
> >> + struct irq_data *d = irq_get_irq_data(virq + i);
Hi Thomas,
On 20/07/2016 11:04, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> On Tue, 19 Jul 2016, Eric Auger wrote:
>> /**
>> + * msi_handle_doorbell_mappings: in case the irq data corresponds to an
>> + * MSI that requires iommu mapping, traverse the irq domain hierarchy
>> + * to retrieve the doorbells to handle
On Tue, 19 Jul 2016, Eric Auger wrote:
> /**
> + * msi_handle_doorbell_mappings: in case the irq data corresponds to an
> + * MSI that requires iommu mapping, traverse the irq domain hierarchy
> + * to retrieve the doorbells to handle and iommu_map/unmap them according
> + * to @map boolean.
> +
This patch handles the iommu mapping of MSI doorbells that require to
be mapped in an iommu domain. This happens on msi_domain_alloc/free_irqs
since this is called in code that can sleep (pci_enable/disable_msi):
iommu_map/unmap is not stated as atomic. On msi_domain_(de)activate and
