Virtualization - Jan 2023 - [PATCH 1/8] iommu: Add a gfp parameter to iommu_map()

On Fri, Jan 20, 2023 at 10:24:55AM +0100, Joerg Roedel
wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 06, 2023 at 01:24:11PM -0400, Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
> > I think it is just better to follow kernel convention and have
> > allocation functions include the GFP because it is a clear signal to
> > the user that there is an allocation hidden inside the API. The whole
> > point of gfp is not to have multitudes of every function for every
> > allocation mode.
> 
> Well, having GFP parameters is not a strict kernel convention. There are
> places doing it differently and have sleeping and atomic variants of
> APIs. I have to say I like the latter more. But given that this leads to
> an invasion of API functions here which all do the same under the hood, I
> agree it is better to go with a GFP parameter here.
Ok, I think we are done with this series, I'll stick it in linux-next
for a bit and send you a PR so the trees stay in sync

Thanks,
Jason

On Fri, Jan 20, 2023 at 01:53:40PM -0400, Jason Gunthorpe
wrote:
> > Well, having GFP parameters is not a strict kernel convention. There
are
> > places doing it differently and have sleeping and atomic variants of
> > APIs. I have to say I like the latter more. But given that this leads
to
> > an invasion of API functions here which all do the same under the
hood, I
> > agree it is better to go with a GFP parameter here.
> 
> Ok, I think we are done with this series, I'll stick it in linux-next
> for a bit and send you a PR so the trees stay in sync
This series mostly touches parts outside of IOMMUFD, so we should follow
the process here and let this reach linux-next via the IOMMU tree.
Please send me a new version and I will put it into a separate branch
where you can pull it from.

Regards,

	Joerg