similar to: [RFC PATCH 10/12] virtio/s390: consolidate DMA allocations

On Wed, 10 Apr 2019 19:48:49 +0200 Halil Pasic <pasic at linux.ibm.com> wrote: > On Wed, 10 Apr 2019 18:36:43 +0200 > Cornelia Huck <cohuck at redhat.com> wrote: > > > On Wed, 10 Apr 2019 17:12:54 +0200 > > Halil Pasic <pasic at linux.ibm.com> wrote: > > > > > On Wed, 10 Apr 2019 10:46:49 +0200 > > > Cornelia Huck <cohuck at

On Fri, 5 Apr 2019 01:16:20 +0200 Halil Pasic <pasic at linux.ibm.com> wrote: > We can reduce the number of DMA allocations by pulling the bits > of memory that belongs to virtio_ccw_device and needs to be DMA > memory into a single area. That makes a lot of sense (maybe start with introducing the dma area from the beginning?), but... > > Signed-off-by: Halil Pasic

On 26/04/2019 20:32, Halil Pasic wrote: > Before virtio-ccw could get away with not using DMA API for the pieces of > memory it does ccw I/O with. With protected virtualization this has to > change, since the hypervisor needs to read and sometimes also write these > pieces of memory. > > The hypervisor is supposed to poke the classic notifiers, if these are > used, out of

On 26/04/2019 20:32, Halil Pasic wrote: > Before virtio-ccw could get away with not using DMA API for the pieces of > memory it does ccw I/O with. With protected virtualization this has to > change, since the hypervisor needs to read and sometimes also write these > pieces of memory. > > The hypervisor is supposed to poke the classic notifiers, if these are > used, out of

From: Halil Pasic <pasic at linux.ibm.com> Before virtio-ccw could get away with not using DMA API for the pieces of memory it does ccw I/O with. With protected virtualization this has to change, since the hypervisor needs to read and sometimes also write these pieces of memory. The hypervisor is supposed to poke the classic notifiers, if these are used, out of band with regards to ccw

From: Halil Pasic <pasic at linux.ibm.com> Before virtio-ccw could get away with not using DMA API for the pieces of memory it does ccw I/O with. With protected virtualization this has to change, since the hypervisor needs to read and sometimes also write these pieces of memory. The hypervisor is supposed to poke the classic notifiers, if these are used, out of band with regards to ccw

Before virtio-ccw could get away with not using DMA API for the pieces of memory it does ccw I/O with. With protected virtualization this has to change, since the hypervisor needs to read and sometimes also write these pieces of memory. The hypervisor is supposed to poke the classic notifiers, if these are used, out of band with regards to ccw I/O. So these need to be allocated as DMA memory

Before virtio-ccw could get away with not using DMA API for the pieces of memory it does ccw I/O with. With protected virtualization this has to change, since the hypervisor needs to read and sometimes also write these pieces of memory. The hypervisor is supposed to poke the classic notifiers, if these are used, out of band with regards to ccw I/O. So these need to be allocated as DMA memory

Before virtio-ccw could get away with not using DMA API for the pieces of memory it does ccw I/O with. With protected virtualization this has to change, since the hypervisor needs to read and sometimes also write these pieces of memory. The hypervisor is supposed to poke the classic notifiers, if these are used, out of band with regards to ccw I/O. So these need to be allocated as DMA memory

From: Halil Pasic <pasic at linux.ibm.com> This will come in handy soon when we pull out the indicators from virtio_ccw_device to a memory area that is shared with the hypervisor (in particular for protected virtualization guests). Signed-off-by: Halil Pasic <pasic at linux.ibm.com> Reviewed-by: Pierre Morel <pmorel at linux.ibm.com> --- drivers/s390/virtio/virtio_ccw.c | 40

From: Halil Pasic <pasic at linux.ibm.com> This will come in handy soon when we pull out the indicators from virtio_ccw_device to a memory area that is shared with the hypervisor (in particular for protected virtualization guests). Signed-off-by: Halil Pasic <pasic at linux.ibm.com> Reviewed-by: Pierre Morel <pmorel at linux.ibm.com> Signed-off-by: Michael Mueller <mimu at

On 26/04/2019 20:32, Halil Pasic wrote: > This will come in handy soon when we pull out the indicators from > virtio_ccw_device to a memory area that is shared with the hypervisor > (in particular for protected virtualization guests). > > Signed-off-by: Halil Pasic <pasic at linux.ibm.com> > --- > drivers/s390/virtio/virtio_ccw.c | 40

On 26/04/2019 20:32, Halil Pasic wrote: > This will come in handy soon when we pull out the indicators from > virtio_ccw_device to a memory area that is shared with the hypervisor > (in particular for protected virtualization guests). > > Signed-off-by: Halil Pasic <pasic at linux.ibm.com> > --- > drivers/s390/virtio/virtio_ccw.c | 40

This will come in handy soon when we pull out the indicators from virtio_ccw_device to a memory area that is shared with the hypervisor (in particular for protected virtualization guests). Signed-off-by: Halil Pasic <pasic at linux.ibm.com> --- drivers/s390/virtio/virtio_ccw.c | 40 +++++++++++++++++++++++++--------------- 1 file changed, 25 insertions(+), 15 deletions(-) diff --git

This will come in handy soon when we pull out the indicators from virtio_ccw_device to a memory area that is shared with the hypervisor (in particular for protected virtualization guests). Signed-off-by: Halil Pasic <pasic at linux.ibm.com> Reviewed-by: Pierre Morel <pmorel at linux.ibm.com> Reviewed-by: Cornelia Huck <cohuck at redhat.com> --- drivers/s390/virtio/virtio_ccw.c

On 08/05/2019 16:31, Pierre Morel wrote: > On 26/04/2019 20:32, Halil Pasic wrote: >> This will come in handy soon when we pull out the indicators from >> virtio_ccw_device to a memory area that is shared with the hypervisor >> (in particular for protected virtualization guests). >> >> Signed-off-by: Halil Pasic <pasic at linux.ibm.com> >> --- >>

On Fri, 10 May 2019 09:43:08 +0200 Pierre Morel <pmorel at linux.ibm.com> wrote: > On 09/05/2019 20:26, Halil Pasic wrote: > > On Thu, 9 May 2019 14:01:01 +0200 > > Pierre Morel <pmorel at linux.ibm.com> wrote: > > > >> On 08/05/2019 16:31, Pierre Morel wrote: > >>> On 26/04/2019 20:32, Halil Pasic wrote: > >>>> This will come

On Fri, 10 May 2019 17:36:05 +0200 Pierre Morel <pmorel at linux.ibm.com> wrote: > On 10/05/2019 13:54, Halil Pasic wrote: > > On Fri, 10 May 2019 09:43:08 +0200 > > Pierre Morel <pmorel at linux.ibm.com> wrote: > > > >> On 09/05/2019 20:26, Halil Pasic wrote: > >>> On Thu, 9 May 2019 14:01:01 +0200 > >>> Pierre Morel

On 09/05/2019 20:26, Halil Pasic wrote: > On Thu, 9 May 2019 14:01:01 +0200 > Pierre Morel <pmorel at linux.ibm.com> wrote: > >> On 08/05/2019 16:31, Pierre Morel wrote: >>> On 26/04/2019 20:32, Halil Pasic wrote: >>>> This will come in handy soon when we pull out the indicators from >>>> virtio_ccw_device to a memory area that is shared with

On 09/05/2019 20:26, Halil Pasic wrote: > On Thu, 9 May 2019 14:01:01 +0200 > Pierre Morel <pmorel at linux.ibm.com> wrote: > >> On 08/05/2019 16:31, Pierre Morel wrote: >>> On 26/04/2019 20:32, Halil Pasic wrote: >>>> This will come in handy soon when we pull out the indicators from >>>> virtio_ccw_device to a memory area that is shared with