search for: zpci_iomap_entri

Displaying 14 results from an estimated 14 matches for "zpci_iomap_entri".

Did you mean: zpci_iomap_entry
2014 Dec 19
2
[PATCH RFC 2/5] s390: add pci_iomap_range
On Mon, 15 Dec 2014, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: > From: Michael S Tsirkin <mst at redhat.com> > > Virtio drivers should map the part of the range they need, not > necessarily all of it. > To this end, support mapping ranges within BAR on s390. > Since multiple ranges can now be mapped within a BAR, we keep track of > the number of mappings created, and only clear out the
2014 Dec 19
2
[PATCH RFC 2/5] s390: add pci_iomap_range
On Mon, 15 Dec 2014, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: > From: Michael S Tsirkin <mst at redhat.com> > > Virtio drivers should map the part of the range they need, not > necessarily all of it. > To this end, support mapping ranges within BAR on s390. > Since multiple ranges can now be mapped within a BAR, we keep track of > the number of mappings created, and only clear out the
2014 Dec 15
0
[PATCH RFC 2/5] s390: add pci_iomap_range
From: Michael S Tsirkin <mst at redhat.com> Virtio drivers should map the part of the range they need, not necessarily all of it. To this end, support mapping ranges within BAR on s390. Since multiple ranges can now be mapped within a BAR, we keep track of the number of mappings created, and only clear out the mapping for a BAR when this number reaches 0. Signed-off-by: Michael S. Tsirkin
2014 Dec 15
0
[PATCH RFC 2/5] s390: add pci_iomap_range
From: Michael S Tsirkin <mst at redhat.com> Virtio drivers should map the part of the range they need, not necessarily all of it. To this end, support mapping ranges within BAR on s390. Since multiple ranges can now be mapped within a BAR, we keep track of the number of mappings created, and only clear out the mapping for a BAR when this number reaches 0. Signed-off-by: Michael S. Tsirkin
2015 Jan 14
0
[PATCH v3 10/16] s390: add pci_iomap_range
Virtio drivers should map the part of the range they need, not necessarily all of it. To this end, support mapping ranges within BAR on s390. Since multiple ranges can now be mapped within a BAR, we keep track of the number of mappings created, and only clear out the mapping for a BAR when this number reaches 0. Cc: Bjorn Helgaas <bhelgaas at google.com> Cc: linux-pci at vger.kernel.org
2015 Jan 14
0
[PATCH v3 10/16] s390: add pci_iomap_range
Virtio drivers should map the part of the range they need, not necessarily all of it. To this end, support mapping ranges within BAR on s390. Since multiple ranges can now be mapped within a BAR, we keep track of the number of mappings created, and only clear out the mapping for a BAR when this number reaches 0. Cc: Bjorn Helgaas <bhelgaas at google.com> Cc: linux-pci at vger.kernel.org
2014 Dec 19
0
[PATCH RFC 2/5] s390: add pci_iomap_range
On Fri, Dec 19, 2014 at 03:13:37PM +0100, Sebastian Ott wrote: > On Mon, 15 Dec 2014, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: > > From: Michael S Tsirkin <mst at redhat.com> > > > > Virtio drivers should map the part of the range they need, not > > necessarily all of it. > > To this end, support mapping ranges within BAR on s390. > > Since multiple ranges can now be
2014 Dec 19
0
[PATCH RFC 2/5] s390: add pci_iomap_range
On Fri, Dec 19, 2014 at 03:13:37PM +0100, Sebastian Ott wrote: > On Mon, 15 Dec 2014, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: > > From: Michael S Tsirkin <mst at redhat.com> > > > > Virtio drivers should map the part of the range they need, not > > necessarily all of it. > > To this end, support mapping ranges within BAR on s390. > > Since multiple ranges can now be
2015 Jan 16
1
[PATCH v3 10/16] s390: add pci_iomap_range
On Wed, 14 Jan 2015, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: > Virtio drivers should map the part of the range they need, not > necessarily all of it. > To this end, support mapping ranges within BAR on s390. > Since multiple ranges can now be mapped within a BAR, we keep track of > the number of mappings created, and only clear out the mapping for a BAR > when this number reaches 0. >
2015 Jan 16
1
[PATCH v3 10/16] s390: add pci_iomap_range
On Wed, 14 Jan 2015, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: > Virtio drivers should map the part of the range they need, not > necessarily all of it. > To this end, support mapping ranges within BAR on s390. > Since multiple ranges can now be mapped within a BAR, we keep track of > the number of mappings created, and only clear out the mapping for a BAR > when this number reaches 0. >
2014 Dec 15
6
[PATCH RFC 0/5] virtio pci: virtio 1.0 support
This is on top of 3.19 master + my bugfix patches, and adds virtio 1.0 support to virtio pci. This is 3.20 material I think. Would like to get feedback on s390 change as it's untested. Michael S Tsirkin (2): pci: add pci_iomap_range s390: add pci_iomap_range Michael S. Tsirkin (2): virtio_pci: modern driver virtio_pci: macros for PCI layout offsets. Rusty Russell (1): virtio-pci:
2014 Dec 15
6
[PATCH RFC 0/5] virtio pci: virtio 1.0 support
This is on top of 3.19 master + my bugfix patches, and adds virtio 1.0 support to virtio pci. This is 3.20 material I think. Would like to get feedback on s390 change as it's untested. Michael S Tsirkin (2): pci: add pci_iomap_range s390: add pci_iomap_range Michael S. Tsirkin (2): virtio_pci: modern driver virtio_pci: macros for PCI layout offsets. Rusty Russell (1): virtio-pci:
2015 Jan 14
22
[PATCH v3 00/16] virtio-pci: towards virtio 1.0 guest support
Changes since v2: handling for devices without config space (e.g. rng) reduce # of mappings for VQs These patches seem to work fine on my virtio-1.0 qemu branch. There haven't been any bugs since v2: just minor cleanups and enhancements. QEMU side is still undergoing polishing, but is already testable. Rusty, what do you think? Let's merge these for 3.20? Also - will you be doing that
2015 Jan 14
22
[PATCH v3 00/16] virtio-pci: towards virtio 1.0 guest support
Changes since v2: handling for devices without config space (e.g. rng) reduce # of mappings for VQs These patches seem to work fine on my virtio-1.0 qemu branch. There haven't been any bugs since v2: just minor cleanups and enhancements. QEMU side is still undergoing polishing, but is already testable. Rusty, what do you think? Let's merge these for 3.20? Also - will you be doing that