Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1755228AbZGMJke (ORCPT ); Mon, 13 Jul 2009 05:40:34 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1754932AbZGMJkd (ORCPT ); Mon, 13 Jul 2009 05:40:33 -0400 Received: from smtp02.citrix.com ([66.165.176.63]:33285 "EHLO SMTP02.CITRIX.COM" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754853AbZGMJkc (ORCPT ); Mon, 13 Jul 2009 05:40:32 -0400 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.42,389,1243828800"; d="scan'208";a="58187036" Subject: Re: [00/15] swiotlb cleanup From: Ian Campbell To: FUJITA Tomonori CC: "mingo@elte.hu" , "jeremy@goop.org" , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , "linux-ia64@vger.kernel.org" , "linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org" , "benh@kernel.crashing.org" , "tony.luck@intel.com" , "x86@kernel.org" , "beckyb@kernel.crashing.org" , "joerg.roedel@amd.com" In-Reply-To: <20090713131859N.fujita.tomonori@lab.ntt.co.jp> References: <20090710051236.GA22218@elte.hu> <20090710143408A.fujita.tomonori@lab.ntt.co.jp> <1247234520.4002.418.camel@zakaz.uk.xensource.com> <20090713131859N.fujita.tomonori@lab.ntt.co.jp> Content-Type: text/plain Organization: Citrix Systems, Inc. Date: Mon, 13 Jul 2009 10:40:29 +0100 Message-ID: <1247478029.11668.10.camel@zakaz.uk.xensource.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.22.3.1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1388 Lines: 34 On Mon, 2009-07-13 at 05:20 +0100, FUJITA Tomonori wrote: > On Fri, 10 Jul 2009 15:02:00 +0100 > Ian Campbell 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. Ian. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/