On Wed, 2010-02-03 at 17:15 +0000, Jeff Garzik wrote: > On 02/03/2010 12:06 PM, Andrew Morton wrote: > > On Wed, 03 Feb 2010 12:00:58 -0500 Jeff Garzik<jgarzik@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > >> On 02/03/2010 11:40 AM, James Bottomley wrote: > >>> The fix to libata looks to be just that it should kmap all the time > >>> rather than trying to fiddle with the page to see if its higmem. For > >>> kmap on a normal page, we should just return the offset map address and > >>> do all the flushing. > >> > >> libata tests PageHighMem() because it was measurably faster to do things > >> the current way (which includes local_irq_save/restore, only for > >> highmem) on boxes where it actually matters. > >> > >> It seems more efficient to add a flush where necessary, than > >> unconditionally punish everyone... > > > > kmap_atomic() tests PageHighMem() too - it's pretty lightweight for > > lowmem pages. > > Note the lack of local_irq_save/restore in our code, though... These > PIO xfers are __slow__, from the perspective of a CPU manufactured in > the past decade; you are definitely disabling local interrupts for a > long time. I suppose we could do > > if (high mem) > local irq save > kmap > xfer > kunmap > local irq restore > else > kmap > xfer > kunmap > > does that solve the problem for ARM, for 2.6.33? No, it doesn't. If the page isn't a highmem one, the kunmap doesn't do anything to the caches (and I also have highmem disabled). My logic was based on a statement in cachetlb.txt that flush_dcache_page() should be called if the kernel writes to a page cache page, hence the patch (as it was pointed out, the first call to flush_dcache_page() isn't needed). -- Catalin -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-ide" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
