[dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2 11/12] mempool: honor iova mode in virt2phy

santosh santosh.shukla at caviumnetworks.com
Mon Jul 10 16:22:34 CEST 2017


On Monday 10 July 2017 07:39 PM, Thomas Monjalon wrote:

> 10/07/2017 15:56, santosh:
>> On Monday 10 July 2017 07:21 PM, Thomas Monjalon wrote:
>>
>>> 10/07/2017 15:30, santosh:
>>>> Hi Olivier,
>>>>
>>>> On Monday 10 July 2017 05:57 PM, Olivier Matz wrote:
>>>>> I didn't check the patchset in detail, but in my understanding,
>>>>> what we call physaddr in dpdk is actually a bus address. Shouldn't
>>>>> we start to rename some of these fields and functions to avoid
>>>>> confusion?
>>>> Agree.
>>>> While working on iova mode thing and reading these vir2phy api -
>>>> confused me more. Actually it should be iova2va, va2iova or pa2iova,iova2pa..
>>>> where iova address is nothing but bus address Or we should refer to linux
>>>> semantics.
>>>>
>>>> We thought of addressing semantics after this series, Not a priority in IMO.
>>> I think it is a priority to start with semantics.
>>> The work is too hard with wrong semantic otherwise.
>> Sorry, I don;t agree with you. Semantic shouldn't lower the iova priority.
>> iova framework is blocking SoC's. w/o iova framework : One has to live with
>> hackish solution for their SoC.
>>
>> Semantic change in any-case could be pipelined. It shouldn't be like
>> Semantics change gets priority and therefore it blocks other SoCs.
> I am not saying it is blocking.
> I just say that you have not started your work by the beginning,
> and now it make reviews difficult (from what I understand).
> You must make all the efforts to make your patches easier to
> understand and accept.

It's just about changing name for virt2phy api's.. But changing those function
names require deprecation notice, Once iova patchset is merged then I'll
take up responsibility for sending deprecation notice and change those api
name in the next release.
 



More information about the dev mailing list