On Wed, Dec 16, 2009 at 03:47:48PM -0700, Dan Williams wrote: > Kumar Gala wrote: > >>> Changes with respect to v1 as per comments received > >>> o. Rebased to linux-next as of 20091216 > >>> o. The selection is based exclusive of fsldma > >>> o. Intoduced a new Kernel Configuration variable > >>> *. This enables selecting the Cryptographic functionality > >>> of Talitos along with fsldma. > >>> *. Disables the XOR parity calculation offload, if fsldma enabled > >>> either as kernel in-built or as a module > >>> *. Once the inter-operability with fsldma is resolved, this option > >>> can be removed > >> wait, why can't the interoperability bug be fixed in the first place? > > > > I agree w/Kim. We need to better understand what the bug is and how to reproduce it so we can get to the root cause. > > > > Paper taping over it by disabling fsldma is not the right solution. > > Hopefully this prompts fsldma authors to get involved because the > interoperability issue has been out there without comment*, just > band-aids, since October. > > -- > Dan > > * well one comment from Ira saying the interrupt functionality worked > for him. Yes, I have used the device_prep_dma_interrupt() functionality quite a while back. However, I found it to be pretty much useless. Any functionality I need is covered by adding a callback to the last DMA memcpy() operation. Since the operations happen in-order, I can be sure that the entire set of memcpy()s cas completed. I never needed the capability to generate an interrupt without a memcpy(). I agree that the fsldma driver could use some love. There are places where I am still not confident in the locking. Perhaps I can find some time over Christmas to work on it, but I need someone with 85xx/86xx hardware to test the changes. I only have 83xx hardware. Ira -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-raid" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
