Hi, all.
On Wed, May 17, 2017 at 6:39 PM, Jan Beulich wrote:
On 17.05.17 at 17:28, wrote:
>> Hi, Jan.
>>
>> On Tue, May 16, 2017 at 4:11 PM, Jan Beulich wrote:
>> On 16.05.17 at 14:48, wrote:
On Mon, May 15, 2017 at 3:33 PM, Jan Beulich wrote:
On 15.05.17 at 12:43, wro
>>> On 17.05.17 at 17:28, wrote:
> Hi, Jan.
>
> On Tue, May 16, 2017 at 4:11 PM, Jan Beulich wrote:
> On 16.05.17 at 14:48, wrote:
>>> On Mon, May 15, 2017 at 3:33 PM, Jan Beulich wrote:
>>> On 15.05.17 at 12:43, wrote:
> Indeed, there was some misunderstanding from my side on thi
Hi, Jan.
On Tue, May 16, 2017 at 4:11 PM, Jan Beulich wrote:
On 16.05.17 at 14:48, wrote:
>> On Mon, May 15, 2017 at 3:33 PM, Jan Beulich wrote:
>> On 15.05.17 at 12:43, wrote:
Indeed, there was some misunderstanding from my side on this.
Let me elaborate a bit more on this:
>>> On 16.05.17 at 14:48, wrote:
> On Mon, May 15, 2017 at 3:33 PM, Jan Beulich wrote:
> On 15.05.17 at 12:43, wrote:
>>> Indeed, there was some misunderstanding from my side on this.
>>> Let me elaborate a bit more on this:
>>> 1. Yes, this TODO shouldn't be just dropped, but needs to be
>>
Hi, Jan
On Mon, May 15, 2017 at 3:33 PM, Jan Beulich wrote:
On 15.05.17 at 12:43, wrote:
>> On Mon, May 15, 2017 at 10:22 AM, Jan Beulich wrote:
>> On 12.05.17 at 18:25, wrote:
On Fri, May 12, 2017 at 7:17 PM, Jan Beulich wrote:
On 12.05.17 at 17:50, wrote:
>> On F
>>> On 15.05.17 at 12:43, wrote:
> On Mon, May 15, 2017 at 10:22 AM, Jan Beulich wrote:
> On 12.05.17 at 18:25, wrote:
>>> On Fri, May 12, 2017 at 7:17 PM, Jan Beulich wrote:
>>> On 12.05.17 at 17:50, wrote:
> On Fri, May 12, 2017 at 5:23 PM, Jan Beulich wrote:
> On 10.05.
Hi, Jan
On Mon, May 15, 2017 at 10:22 AM, Jan Beulich wrote:
On 12.05.17 at 18:25, wrote:
>> On Fri, May 12, 2017 at 7:17 PM, Jan Beulich wrote:
>> On 12.05.17 at 17:50, wrote:
On Fri, May 12, 2017 at 5:23 PM, Jan Beulich wrote:
On 10.05.17 at 16:03, wrote:
>> @@ -
>>> On 12.05.17 at 18:25, wrote:
> On Fri, May 12, 2017 at 7:17 PM, Jan Beulich wrote:
> On 12.05.17 at 17:50, wrote:
>>> On Fri, May 12, 2017 at 5:23 PM, Jan Beulich wrote:
>>> On 10.05.17 at 16:03, wrote:
> @@ -771,6 +773,47 @@ int amd_iommu_unmap_page(struct domain *d, unsigned
On Fri, May 12, 2017 at 7:17 PM, Jan Beulich wrote:
On 12.05.17 at 17:50, wrote:
>> On Fri, May 12, 2017 at 5:23 PM, Jan Beulich wrote:
>> On 10.05.17 at 16:03, wrote:
@@ -771,6 +773,47 @@ int amd_iommu_unmap_page(struct domain *d, unsigned
long gfn)
return 0;
>>> On 12.05.17 at 17:50, wrote:
> On Fri, May 12, 2017 at 5:23 PM, Jan Beulich wrote:
> On 10.05.17 at 16:03, wrote:
>>> @@ -771,6 +773,47 @@ int amd_iommu_unmap_page(struct domain *d, unsigned
>>> long gfn)
>>> return 0;
>>> }
>>>
>>> +/* TODO: Optimize by squashing map_pages/unmap_
Hi Jan.
On Fri, May 12, 2017 at 5:23 PM, Jan Beulich wrote:
On 10.05.17 at 16:03, wrote:
>> @@ -771,6 +773,47 @@ int amd_iommu_unmap_page(struct domain *d, unsigned
>> long gfn)
>> return 0;
>> }
>>
>> +/* TODO: Optimize by squashing map_pages/unmap_pages with
>> map_page/unmap_page
>>> On 10.05.17 at 16:03, wrote:
> @@ -771,6 +773,47 @@ int amd_iommu_unmap_page(struct domain *d, unsigned long
> gfn)
> return 0;
> }
>
> +/* TODO: Optimize by squashing map_pages/unmap_pages with
> map_page/unmap_page */
Looking over the titles of the rest of this series it doesn't l
From: Oleksandr Tyshchenko
Replace existing single-page stuff (IOMMU APIs and platform callbacks)
with the multi-page one followed by modifications of all related parts.
These new map_pages/unmap_pages APIs do almost the same thing
as old map_page/unmap_page ones except the formers have extra
or
13 matches
Mail list logo
