Re: [PATCH 3/3] swiotlb: use GFP_DMA32 instead of GFP_DMA inswiotlb_alloc_coherent

[FUJITA Tomonori]

On Wed, 3 Sep 2008 22:05:27 +0200
Joerg Roedel <joro@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> On Thu, Sep 04, 2008 at 03:04:25AM +0900, FUJITA Tomonori wrote:
> > x86 sets up gfp flag propely so swiotlb_alloc_coherent doesn't need to
> > use GFP_DMA unconditionally. It leads to allocation failures in some
> > systems.
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: FUJITA Tomonori <fujita.tomonori@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > ---
> >  lib/swiotlb.c |    7 +------
> >  1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
> > 
> > diff --git a/lib/swiotlb.c b/lib/swiotlb.c
> > index 977edbd..b88d7c2 100644
> > --- a/lib/swiotlb.c
> > +++ b/lib/swiotlb.c
> > @@ -467,12 +467,7 @@ swiotlb_alloc_coherent(struct device *hwdev, size_t size,
> >  	void *ret;
> >  	int order = get_order(size);
> >  
> > -	/*
> > -	 * XXX fix me: the DMA API should pass us an explicit DMA mask
> > -	 * instead, or use ZONE_DMA32 (ia64 overloads ZONE_DMA to be a ~32
> > -	 * bit range instead of a 16MB one).
> > -	 */
> > -	flags |= GFP_DMA;
> > +	flags |= GFP_DMA32;
> 
> No. This is exactly the place where the swiotlb iommu implementation
> should handle the dma_mask of the specific device. Unconditionally use
> DMA32 here is not the best possible handling.

Not best but it works though ideally we can just remove the flags hack
completely.
--
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/