I'm also still curious about this:
On Tue, May 20, 2008 at 08:46:08PM -0400, bfields wrote:
> On Sun, May 18, 2008 at 07:13:18PM -0500, Tom Tucker wrote:
> > @@ -181,14 +170,20 @@ static int send_write(struct svcxprt_rdma *xprt, struct svc_rqst *rqstp,
> >
> > /* Copy the remaining SGE */
> > while (bc != 0 && xdr_sge_no < sge_count) {
> > - sge[sge_no].addr = xdr_sge[xdr_sge_no].addr + sge_off;
> > sge[sge_no].lkey = xdr_sge[xdr_sge_no].lkey;
> > sge_bytes = min((size_t)bc,
> > (size_t)(xdr_sge[xdr_sge_no].length-sge_off));
> > sge[sge_no].length = sge_bytes;
> > -
> > + sge[sge_no].addr =
> > + ib_dma_map_single(xprt->sc_cm_id->device,
> > + (void *)
> > + xdr_sge[xdr_sge_no].addr + sge_off,
> > + sge_bytes, DMA_TO_DEVICE);
> > + if (dma_mapping_error(sge[sge_no].addr))
> > + return -EINVAL;
>
> And then here we're casting the u64 back to a void *. Also, we're
> adding sge_off to the input, instead of to the result. Is it true that
> that
>
> ib_dma_map_single(., x + sge_off, ., .)
>
> and
>
> ib_dma_map_single(., x, ., .) + sge_off
>
> always have the same result?
>
> --b.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-nfs" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
