Displaying 14 results from an estimated 14 matches for "virtio_iv_bits".
2019 May 27
1
[PATCH v2 5/8] virtio/s390: use cacheline aligned airq bit vectors
...b025..1da7430f94c8 100644
> --- a/drivers/s390/virtio/virtio_ccw.c
> +++ b/drivers/s390/virtio/virtio_ccw.c
> @@ -216,7 +216,8 @@ static struct airq_info *new_airq_info(void)
> if (!info)
> return NULL;
> rwlock_init(&info->lock);
> - info->aiv = airq_iv_create(VIRTIO_IV_BITS, AIRQ_IV_ALLOC | AIRQ_IV_PTR);
> + info->aiv = airq_iv_create(VIRTIO_IV_BITS, AIRQ_IV_ALLOC | AIRQ_IV_PTR
> + | AIRQ_IV_CACHELINE);
> if (!info->aiv) {
> kfree(info);
> return NULL;
This patch looks to be independent of the previous patches?
2019 May 16
3
[PATCH 05/10] s390/cio: introduce DMA pools to cio
On Sun, 12 May 2019, Halil Pasic wrote:
> I've also got code that deals with AIRQ_IV_CACHELINE by turning the
> kmem_cache into a dma_pool.
>
> Cornelia, Sebastian which approach do you prefer:
> 1) get rid of cio_dma_pool and AIRQ_IV_CACHELINE, and waste a page per
> vector, or
> 2) go with the approach taken by the patch below?
We only have a couple of users for
2019 May 16
3
[PATCH 05/10] s390/cio: introduce DMA pools to cio
On Sun, 12 May 2019, Halil Pasic wrote:
> I've also got code that deals with AIRQ_IV_CACHELINE by turning the
> kmem_cache into a dma_pool.
>
> Cornelia, Sebastian which approach do you prefer:
> 1) get rid of cio_dma_pool and AIRQ_IV_CACHELINE, and waste a page per
> vector, or
> 2) go with the approach taken by the patch below?
We only have a couple of users for
2019 May 22
1
[PATCH 05/10] s390/cio: introduce DMA pools to cio
On Mon, 20 May 2019, Halil Pasic wrote:
> On Thu, 16 May 2019 15:59:22 +0200 (CEST)
> Sebastian Ott <sebott at linux.ibm.com> wrote:
> > We only have a couple of users for airq_iv:
> >
> > virtio_ccw.c: 2K bits
>
> You mean a single allocation is 2k bits (VIRTIO_IV_BITS = 256 * 8)? My
> understanding is that the upper bound is more like:
> MAX_AIRQ_AREAS * VIRTIO_IV_BITS = 20 * 256 * 8 = 40960 bits.
>
> In practice it is most likely just 2k.
>
> >
> > pci with floating IRQs: <= 2K (for the per-function bit vectors)
> >...
2019 May 23
0
[PATCH v2 5/8] virtio/s390: use cacheline aligned airq bit vectors
.../virtio/virtio_ccw.c
index f995798bb025..1da7430f94c8 100644
--- a/drivers/s390/virtio/virtio_ccw.c
+++ b/drivers/s390/virtio/virtio_ccw.c
@@ -216,7 +216,8 @@ static struct airq_info *new_airq_info(void)
if (!info)
return NULL;
rwlock_init(&info->lock);
- info->aiv = airq_iv_create(VIRTIO_IV_BITS, AIRQ_IV_ALLOC | AIRQ_IV_PTR);
+ info->aiv = airq_iv_create(VIRTIO_IV_BITS, AIRQ_IV_ALLOC | AIRQ_IV_PTR
+ | AIRQ_IV_CACHELINE);
if (!info->aiv) {
kfree(info);
return NULL;
--
2.13.4
2019 May 29
0
[PATCH v3 5/8] virtio/s390: use cacheline aligned airq bit vectors
.../virtio/virtio_ccw.c
index f995798bb025..1da7430f94c8 100644
--- a/drivers/s390/virtio/virtio_ccw.c
+++ b/drivers/s390/virtio/virtio_ccw.c
@@ -216,7 +216,8 @@ static struct airq_info *new_airq_info(void)
if (!info)
return NULL;
rwlock_init(&info->lock);
- info->aiv = airq_iv_create(VIRTIO_IV_BITS, AIRQ_IV_ALLOC | AIRQ_IV_PTR);
+ info->aiv = airq_iv_create(VIRTIO_IV_BITS, AIRQ_IV_ALLOC | AIRQ_IV_PTR
+ | AIRQ_IV_CACHELINE);
if (!info->aiv) {
kfree(info);
return NULL;
--
2.13.4
2019 Jun 12
0
[PATCH v5 5/8] virtio/s390: use cacheline aligned airq bit vectors
.../virtio/virtio_ccw.c
index f995798bb025..1da7430f94c8 100644
--- a/drivers/s390/virtio/virtio_ccw.c
+++ b/drivers/s390/virtio/virtio_ccw.c
@@ -216,7 +216,8 @@ static struct airq_info *new_airq_info(void)
if (!info)
return NULL;
rwlock_init(&info->lock);
- info->aiv = airq_iv_create(VIRTIO_IV_BITS, AIRQ_IV_ALLOC | AIRQ_IV_PTR);
+ info->aiv = airq_iv_create(VIRTIO_IV_BITS, AIRQ_IV_ALLOC | AIRQ_IV_PTR
+ | AIRQ_IV_CACHELINE);
if (!info->aiv) {
kfree(info);
return NULL;
--
2.17.1
2019 May 20
0
[PATCH 05/10] s390/cio: introduce DMA pools to cio
...refer:
> > 1) get rid of cio_dma_pool and AIRQ_IV_CACHELINE, and waste a page per
> > vector, or
> > 2) go with the approach taken by the patch below?
>
> We only have a couple of users for airq_iv:
>
> virtio_ccw.c: 2K bits
You mean a single allocation is 2k bits (VIRTIO_IV_BITS = 256 * 8)? My
understanding is that the upper bound is more like:
MAX_AIRQ_AREAS * VIRTIO_IV_BITS = 20 * 256 * 8 = 40960 bits.
In practice it is most likely just 2k.
>
> pci with floating IRQs: <= 2K (for the per-function bit vectors)
> 1..4K (for the summary...
2019 May 29
16
[PATCH v3 0/8] s390: virtio: support protected virtualization
Enhanced virtualization protection technology may require the use of
bounce buffers for I/O. While support for this was built into the virtio
core, virtio-ccw wasn't changed accordingly.
Some background on technology (not part of this series) and the
terminology used.
* Protected Virtualization (PV):
Protected Virtualization guarantees, that non-shared memory of a guest
that operates in PV
2019 May 23
18
[PATCH v2 0/8] s390: virtio: support protected virtualization
Enhanced virtualization protection technology may require the use of
bounce buffers for I/O. While support for this was built into the virtio
core, virtio-ccw wasn't changed accordingly.
Some background on technology (not part of this series) and the
terminology used.
* Protected Virtualization (PV):
Protected Virtualization guarantees, that non-shared memory of a guest
that operates in PV
2019 Jun 12
21
[PATCH v5 0/8] s390: virtio: support protected virtualization
Enhanced virtualization protection technology may require the use of
bounce buffers for I/O. While support for this was built into the virtio
core, virtio-ccw wasn't changed accordingly.
Some background on technology (not part of this series) and the
terminology used.
* Protected Virtualization (PV):
Protected Virtualization guarantees, that non-shared memory of a guest
that operates in PV
2019 Jun 12
21
[PATCH v5 0/8] s390: virtio: support protected virtualization
Enhanced virtualization protection technology may require the use of
bounce buffers for I/O. While support for this was built into the virtio
core, virtio-ccw wasn't changed accordingly.
Some background on technology (not part of this series) and the
terminology used.
* Protected Virtualization (PV):
Protected Virtualization guarantees, that non-shared memory of a guest
that operates in PV
2019 Jun 06
15
[PATCH v4 0/8] s390: virtio: support protected virtualization
Enhanced virtualization protection technology may require the use of
bounce buffers for I/O. While support for this was built into the virtio
core, virtio-ccw wasn't changed accordingly.
Some background on technology (not part of this series) and the
terminology used.
* Protected Virtualization (PV):
Protected Virtualization guarantees, that non-shared memory of a guest
that operates in PV
2019 Jun 06
15
[PATCH v4 0/8] s390: virtio: support protected virtualization
Enhanced virtualization protection technology may require the use of
bounce buffers for I/O. While support for this was built into the virtio
core, virtio-ccw wasn't changed accordingly.
Some background on technology (not part of this series) and the
terminology used.
* Protected Virtualization (PV):
Protected Virtualization guarantees, that non-shared memory of a guest
that operates in PV