On Thu, Apr 19, 2018 at 02:00:18PM +0200, Benjamin Drung wrote: > > I applied the same fix as for many other arches, which is to add the > > arch to the > > list of NO_COHERENT_DMA_ARCHS in debian/rules. > > > > I am not sure if support could be added at a later date, but for the > > time being, > > seems to be the best way to get it working -- I don't know enough > > details of the > > architecture or the assembly language to get the necessary > > incantations in > > place. > > RISC-V has a FENCE instruction and the A extension (which is part of > the G instruction set) provides atomic memory operations. So the > architecture should provide coherent DMA support. To enable support, > util/udma_barrier.h needs to be adjusted. I am including > linux-rdma@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx in the loop for help. You can't tell from the instruction set if a chip is DMA coherent or not. It depends how the cache's are designed, and if they have a 'snoop controller' or otherwise. Generally if *any* DMA coherent implementations exist then we should add the fences, otherwise better to just not compile the drivers that have no chance of working. Jason -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-rdma" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
