Re: [Xen-devel] FW: VT-d async invalidation for Device-TLB.

["Xu, Quan" <quan.xu@xxxxxxxxx>]

>June 18, 2015 7:39 PM, <JBeulich@xxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >>> On 18.06.15 at 13:31, <quan.xu@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >> On June 18, 2015 5:19 PM, <JBeulich@xxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >> >>> On 18.06.15 at 10:09, <quan.xu@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >>
> >> >> On 16.06.15 09:59, <mailto:JBeulich@xxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >> >> >>> On 16.06.15 at 09:59, <yang.z.zhang@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >> >> > Jan Beulich wrote on 2015-06-16:
> >> >> >>>>> On 16.06.15 at 05:07, <yang.z.zhang@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >> >> >>> Jan Beulich wrote on 2015-06-15:
> >> >> >>>>>>> On 13.06.15 at 16:44, <quan.xu@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >> >> >>>>>> On 12.06.15 at 14:47, <JBeulich@xxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >> >> >>>>>>>>> On 12.06.15 at 04:40, <quan.xu@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >> >
> >> >> >



> > I can send out two series of patch:
> > 1st: VT-d async invalidation for ATS case.
> > 2nd: VT-d async invalidation for non-ATS case.
> >
> >
> > I think the 1st series of patch is high priority, as it is not
> > correct to spin 1 second for ATS case. I can implement these source
> > code and send out ASAP.
> > 2nd series of patch is low priority, as it's optimization. Also I can
> > provide a serious of patch to fix it later.
> 
> That's fine as long as the second series won't arrive only months later.
> 

I am starting to implement the 1st series -- VT-d async invalidation for ATS 
case.

Quan

_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel