[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <6453C3CB8E2B3646B0D020C1126132730120C51A@sausexmb4.amd.com>
Date: Sat, 28 Jun 2008 09:58:22 -0500
From: "Duran, Leo" <leo.duran@....com>
To: "Duran, Leo" <leo.duran@....com>, "Joerg Roedel" <joro@...tes.org>
CC: "Muli Ben-Yehuda" <muli@...ibm.com>,
"Adrian Bunk" <bunk@...nel.org>,
"Richter, Robert" <rrichter@...e.amd.com>,
<linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, <iommu@...ts.linux-foundation.org>,
"Andi Kleen" <andi@...stfloor.org>,
"Biemueller, Sebastian" <Sebastian.Biemueller@....com>,
<tglx@...utronix.de>, <mingo@...hat.com>,
"Sarathy, Bhavna" <Bhavna.Sarathy@....com>
Subject: RE: [PATCH 01/34] AMD IOMMU: add Kconfig entry
On Saturday, June 28, 2008 6:04 AM, Joerg Roedel wrote:
> Yes, there is only one exclusion range per IOMMU. The problem is that
> an exclusion range from 64MB to the end may not be possible because
> there is an exclusion range already configured in the ACPI table. On
> my System for example the exclusion range is somewhere in the first
> megabyte of RAM.
> In this case the direct mapping using page tables is needed. If there
> is no exclusion range defined in ACPI this idea would work of course.
>
> Joerg
>
It would OK to have ONE all inclusive exclusion range (e.g., 64MB to
'end' if you want).
That is, any pre-defined areas would simply fall inside the larger
range.
And, if the ACPI table calls for exclusion of a range inside the
aperture (e.g., inside 64MB),
that range would have to be 'reserved', and set for 1:1 mapping.
Leo.
--
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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists