Re: [PATCH] swiotlb: enlarge iotlb buffer on demand
From: Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk
Date: Mon Aug 02 2010 - 09:41:04 EST
On Saturday 31 July 2010 23:03:11 FUJITA Tomonori wrote:
> On Fri, 30 Jul 2010 21:07:06 -0400
> Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk <konrad@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > I took your patch and was trying to fit it over the
> > stable/swiotlb-0.8.4 branch and when I did so a found couple of things..
> > > > @@ -215,14 +222,14 @@ swiotlb_late_init_with_default_size(size_t
> > > > default_size) bytes = io_tlb_nslabs << IO_TLB_SHIFT;
> > You should also initialize the __io_tlb_start array first:
> Yeah, I know. As I wrote, this patchset breaks IA64.
> I really merge to swiotlb's two memory allocator mechanisms
> (swiotlb_init_with_default_size and
> swiotlb_late_init_with_default_size). I need to look at the x86 memory
> boot code after memblock surgery finishes.
> And as you know, I've not fixed the error path and swiotlb_free. I'll
> do later if people are not against swiotlb dynamic allocation.
It looks to me like it would be a good patch.
I am curious about the handling of the -ENOMEM stage. Naturally we would
return an error the device - are the most common ones (ahci, r8169,
ata_piix - those that are DMA_32) equipped to deal with unavailable memory?
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/