hi.
On Tue, 2002-02-12 at 03:44, David S. Miller wrote:
> From: Gérard Roudier <groudier@free.fr>
> Date: Sun, 10 Feb 2002 21:20:05 +0100 (CET)
>
> On Mon, 11 Feb 2002, Alan Cox wrote:
>
> > This function may not be called in interrupt context.
>
> Such limitation looks poor implementation to me.
>
> I agree with you Gerard, and probably nobody truly even requires
> this limitation. I do plan to remove it after I've done a thorough
> investigation of the platform implementations.
ok, i've looked through most of 2.5.4 now.
results look like this:
pci_alloc_consistent() pci_free_consistent()
i386:
[1] ok ok
ppc:
[1] ok ok
mips:
[1] ok ok
sh:
[1] ok ok
stm: [1] ok ok
dc: [3] ok ok
mips64:
ip32: [1] ok ok
ip27: [1] ok ok
sparc:
[1] GFP_KERNEL ok
sparc64:
[2] ok ok
arm: [4] BUG()/GFP_KERNEL BUG()
alpha:
[2] ok ok
ia64: [5] ok? ok?
[1]
gfp() + __pa() (or similar)
[2]
gfp() + IOMMU
[3]
dummy, offsets only
[4]
ARM does GFP_KERNEL, and then __ioremaps the underlying pages.
ugh. is that the only way to get the area coherent?
furthermore i don't see why this could not be interrupt safe.
[5]
i don't understand ia64. but it looks somewhat atomic :)
well, assuming i didn't oversee anything, there are indeed few reasons
left why the whole _consistent() machinery shouldn't be callable from
interrupts.
back to my original question: what were the last trees with shrinking
pools? would the original version still work or any redesigns needed?
regards,
dns
-- ___________________________________________________________________________ mailto:stodden@in.tum.de
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Fri Feb 15 2002 - 21:00:50 EST