From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mails.dpdk.org (mails.dpdk.org [217.70.189.124]) by inbox.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A133EA00C5; Tue, 1 Feb 2022 09:28:51 +0100 (CET) Received: from [217.70.189.124] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2072D40691; Tue, 1 Feb 2022 09:28:51 +0100 (CET) Received: from us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com (us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com [170.10.129.124]) by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 382AD40685 for ; Tue, 1 Feb 2022 09:28:49 +0100 (CET) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=redhat.com; s=mimecast20190719; t=1643704128; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: content-transfer-encoding:content-transfer-encoding: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=g+xJ0NxtOfnUTz6cPQlO+ImnIKNoM6rScVgwo7Utd9A=; b=L+yWq+sg1c0A8i6FrVgAZ4m1F6188V6KlwlzoRSQbGl9KfUZRPK3J32Da5/ICmH2/+RBLm sS+chnJv6dt08OTWH5s6mDBQRqTN2jCDsmKHI6+TXLwahHPJcYCI1LBgsQ2AWs1TfjixFa v6ym0aqFOCCqIvB156pFakS5jAUyiLY= Received: from mimecast-mx01.redhat.com (mimecast-mx01.redhat.com [209.132.183.4]) by relay.mimecast.com with ESMTP with STARTTLS (version=TLSv1.2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id us-mta-319-NoGSzYP9MimM9RGY_EQHtw-1; Tue, 01 Feb 2022 03:28:44 -0500 X-MC-Unique: NoGSzYP9MimM9RGY_EQHtw-1 Received: from smtp.corp.redhat.com (int-mx03.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.13]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mimecast-mx01.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 5A2FC1083F65; Tue, 1 Feb 2022 08:28:43 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [10.39.208.24] (unknown [10.39.208.24]) by smtp.corp.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 008105E4AE; Tue, 1 Feb 2022 08:28:41 +0000 (UTC) Message-ID: <2d2831bd-0a8c-2684-118d-37e45fd87994@redhat.com> Date: Tue, 1 Feb 2022 09:28:40 +0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:91.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/91.5.0 Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 0/2] vhost: fix async address mapping To: xuan.ding@intel.com, chenbo.xia@intel.com Cc: dev@dpdk.org, jiayu.hu@intel.com, yuanx.wang@intel.com References: <20220119151016.9970-1-xuan.ding@intel.com> From: Maxime Coquelin In-Reply-To: <20220119151016.9970-1-xuan.ding@intel.com> X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.79 on 10.5.11.13 Authentication-Results: relay.mimecast.com; auth=pass smtp.auth=CUSA124A263 smtp.mailfrom=maxime.coquelin@redhat.com X-Mimecast-Spam-Score: 0 X-Mimecast-Originator: redhat.com Content-Language: en-US Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-BeenThere: dev@dpdk.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: DPDK patches and discussions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: dev-bounces@dpdk.org On 1/19/22 16:10, xuan.ding@intel.com wrote: > From: Xuan Ding > > This patchset fixes the issue of incorrect DMA mapping in PA mode. > Due to the ambiguity of host_phys_addr naming in the guest page > struct, rename it to host_iova. > > v2: > * Change the order of patch. I'm not sure why you changed the order of the patches. Now, the second one is the fix, so it will make the backport more difficult. Either both are considered to be fixes. I think it can make sense as the renaming does not introduce risk of regression and will make backporting patches easier in the future. Other solution is to reverse the order again, but I think tagging the renaming as a fix is OK for me here. What do you think? Regards, Maxime > > Xuan Ding (2): > vhost: rename field in guest page struct > vhost: fix physical address mapping > > lib/vhost/vhost.h | 11 ++-- > lib/vhost/vhost_user.c | 130 ++++++++++++++++++++--------------------- > lib/vhost/virtio_net.c | 11 ++-- > 3 files changed, 75 insertions(+), 77 deletions(-) >