Displaying 3 results from an estimated 3 matches for "dma_ma".
Did you mean:
dma_map
2019 May 20
2
[PATCH 06/10] s390/cio: add basic protected virtualization support
On Sat, 18 May 2019 20:11:00 +0200
Halil Pasic <pasic at linux.ibm.com> wrote:
> On Thu, 16 May 2019 08:29:28 +0200
> Cornelia Huck <cohuck at redhat.com> wrote:
>
> > On Wed, 15 May 2019 22:51:58 +0200
> > Halil Pasic <pasic at linux.ibm.com> wrote:
> Don't like the second sentence. How about "It handles neither QDIO
> in the common code,
2019 May 20
2
[PATCH 06/10] s390/cio: add basic protected virtualization support
On Sat, 18 May 2019 20:11:00 +0200
Halil Pasic <pasic at linux.ibm.com> wrote:
> On Thu, 16 May 2019 08:29:28 +0200
> Cornelia Huck <cohuck at redhat.com> wrote:
>
> > On Wed, 15 May 2019 22:51:58 +0200
> > Halil Pasic <pasic at linux.ibm.com> wrote:
> Don't like the second sentence. How about "It handles neither QDIO
> in the common code,
2019 May 20
0
[PATCH 06/10] s390/cio: add basic protected virtualization support
...t some bits are
dma memory now. Should I provide a more detailed answer to the
questions above?
> I think we can assume that the dma size is at most 31 bits (since that
> is what the common I/O layer needs); but can we also assume that it
> will always be at least 31 bits?
>
You mean dma_mas by dma size?
> My take on this is that we should be sure that we're not digging
> ourselves a hole that will be hard to get out of again should we want to
> support non-virtio-ccw in the future, not that the current
> implementation is necessarily broken.
>
I agree!
Regards,...