linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH V2 2/3] powerpc: Add support for swiotlb on 32-bit

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Fri, 22 May 2009 19:51:46 +0900
From:	FUJITA Tomonori <fujita.tomonori@....ntt.co.jp>
To:	jeremy@...p.org
Cc:	beckyb@...nel.crashing.org, fujita.tomonori@....ntt.co.jp,
	linuxppc-dev@...abs.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	Ian.Campbell@...rix.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH V2 2/3] powerpc: Add support for swiotlb on 32-bit

On Thu, 21 May 2009 13:18:54 -0700
Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy@...p.org> wrote:

> Becky Bruce wrote:
> > I can work with that, but it's going to be a bit inefficient, as I 
> > actually need the dma_addr_t, not the phys_addr_t, so I'll have to 
> > convert.  In every case, this is a conversion I've already done and 
> > that I need in the calling code as well.  Can we pass in both the 
> > phys_addr_t and the dma_addr_t?
> 
> The Xen implementation would needs to do the phys to bus conversion page 
> by page anyway, so it wouldn't help much.  But it also wouldn't hurt.
> 
> How expensive is the phys-to-bus conversion on power?  Is it worth 
> making the interface more complex for?  Would passing phys+bus mean that 
> we wouldn't also need to pass dev?

I don't think so. POWERPC needs it.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/