On Jul 13, 2009, at 10:13 PM, Becky Bruce wrote:
On Jul 10, 2009, at 12:12 AM, Ingo Molnar wrote:* FUJITA Tomonori <fujita.tomonori@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:- removes unused (and unnecessary) hooks in swiotlb.- adds dma_capable() and converts swiotlb to use it. It can be used toknow if a memory area is dma capable or not. I added is_buffer_dma_capable() for the same purpose long ago but it turned out that the function doesn't work on POWERPC. This can be applied cleanly to linux-next, -mm, and mainline. This patchset touches multiple architectures (ia64, powerpc, x86) so I guess that -mm is appropriate for this patchset (I don't care much what tree would merge this though). This is tested on x86 but only compile tested on POWERPC and IA64. Thanks, = arch/ia64/include/asm/dma-mapping.h | 18 ++++++ arch/powerpc/include/asm/dma-mapping.h | 23 +++++++ arch/powerpc/kernel/dma-swiotlb.c | 48 +--------------- arch/x86/include/asm/dma-mapping.h | 18 ++++++ arch/x86/kernel/pci-dma.c | 2 +- arch/x86/kernel/pci-gart_64.c | 5 +- arch/x86/kernel/pci-nommu.c | 2 +- arch/x86/kernel/pci-swiotlb.c | 25 -------- include/linux/dma-mapping.h | 5 -- include/linux/swiotlb.h | 11 ----lib/swiotlb.c | 102 ++++++++ +-----------------------11 files changed, 92 insertions(+), 167 deletions(-)Hm, the functions and facilities you remove here were added as part of preparatory patches for Xen guest support. You were aware of them, you were involved in discussions about those aspects with Ian and Jeremy but still you chose not to Cc: either of them and you failed to address that aspect in the changelogs. I'd like the Xen code to become cleaner more than anyone else here i guess, but patch submission methods like this are not really helpful. A far better method is to be open about such disagreements, to declare them, to Cc: everyone who disagrees, and to line out the arguments in the changelogs as well - instead of just curtly declaring those APIs 'unused' and failing to Cc: involved parties. Alas, on the technical level the cleanups themselves look mostly fine to me. Ian, Jeremy, the changes will alter Xen's use of swiotlb, but can the Xen side still live with these new methods - in particular is dma_capable() sufficient as a mechanism and can the Xen side filter out DMA allocations to make them physically continuous? Ben, Tony, Becky, any objections wrt. the PowerPC / IA64 impact? If everyone agrees i can apply them to the IOMMU tree, test it and push it out to -next, etc.Ingo,With the exception of the patch I commented on, I think these look OK from the powerpc point of view. I've successfully booted one of my test platforms with the entire series applied and will run some more extensive (i.e. not "Whee! A prompt!") tests tomorrow.
Well, I am still testing. I've observed one unexpected LTP testcase failure with these patches applied, but so far have been unable to reproduce it. So these patches are probably OK, but I will look into this some more next week.
-Becky
-Becky _______________________________________________ Linuxppc-dev mailing list Linuxppc-dev@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.ozlabs.org/listinfo/linuxppc-dev
-- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-ia64" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
![]() |