On Mon, Nov 12, 2007 at 12:50:01PM +0200, Muli Ben-Yehuda wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 07, 2007 at 04:21:04PM +0200, Amit Shah wrote:
>
> > We make the dma_mapping_ops structure to point to our structure so
> > that every DMA access goes through us. (This is the reason this only
> > works for 64-bit guest. 32-bit guest doesn't yet have a dma_ops
> > struct.)
>
> I need the same facility for Calgary for falling back to swiotlb if a
> translation is disabled on some slot, and IB needs the same facility
> for some IB adapters (e.g., ipath). Perhaps it's time to consider
> stackable dma-ops (unless someone has a better idea...).
Stackable dma-ops sounds good to me. The only problem is that there is a
performance penalty for devices handled on the bottom of the stack. But
the alternative I can think of, a per-device dma-ops structure, uses more
memory and is much more intrusive to the driver core. So I am fine with
a stackable solution.
Joerg
--
| AMD Saxony Limited Liability Company & Co. KG
Operating | Wilschdorfer Landstr. 101, 01109 Dresden, Germany
System | Register Court Dresden: HRA 4896
Research | General Partner authorized to represent:
Center | AMD Saxony LLC (Wilmington, Delaware, US)
| General Manager of AMD Saxony LLC: Dr. Hans-R. Deppe, Thomas McCoy
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
[Index of Archives]
[Kernel Newbies]
[Netfilter]
[Bugtraq]
[Photo]
[Stuff]
[Gimp]
[Yosemite News]
[MIPS Linux]
[ARM Linux]
[Linux Security]
[Linux RAID]
[Video 4 Linux]
[Linux for the blind]
[Linux Resources]
