[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [PATCH 3/5] libxl / iommu / domctl: introduce XEN_DOMCTL_IOMMU_SET_ALLOCATION...
- To: Paul Durrant <paul@xxxxxxx>, xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
- From: Julien Grall <julien@xxxxxxx>
- Date: Fri, 16 Oct 2020 16:54:32 +0100
- Cc: Paul Durrant <pdurrant@xxxxxxxxxx>, Ian Jackson <iwj@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Wei Liu <wl@xxxxxxx>, Andrew Cooper <andrew.cooper3@xxxxxxxxxx>, George Dunlap <george.dunlap@xxxxxxxxxx>, Jan Beulich <jbeulich@xxxxxxxx>, Stefano Stabellini <sstabellini@xxxxxxxxxx>, Anthony PERARD <anthony.perard@xxxxxxxxxx>, Volodymyr Babchuk <Volodymyr_Babchuk@xxxxxxxx>, Roger Pau Monné <roger.pau@xxxxxxxxxx>
- Delivery-date: Fri, 16 Oct 2020 15:54:51 +0000
- List-id: Xen developer discussion <xen-devel.lists.xenproject.org>
Hi Paul,
On 05/10/2020 10:49, Paul Durrant wrote:
From: Paul Durrant <pdurrant@xxxxxxxxxx>
... sub-operation of XEN_DOMCTL_iommu_ctl.
This patch adds a new sub-operation into the domctl. The code in iommu_ctl()
is extended to call a new arch-specific iommu_set_allocation() function which
will be called with the IOMMU page-table overhead (in 4k pages) in response
Why 4KB? Wouldn't it be better to use the hypervisor page size instead?
diff --git a/xen/include/public/domctl.h b/xen/include/public/domctl.h
index 75e855625a..6402678838 100644
--- a/xen/include/public/domctl.h
+++ b/xen/include/public/domctl.h
@@ -1138,8 +1138,16 @@ struct xen_domctl_vuart_op {
#define XEN_DOMCTL_IOMMU_INVALID 0
+#define XEN_DOMCTL_IOMMU_SET_ALLOCATION 1
+struct xen_domctl_iommu_set_allocation {
+ uint32_t nr_pages;
Shouldn't this be a 64-bit value?
Cheers,
--
Julien Grall
|
