[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20080724081528F.fujita.tomonori@lab.ntt.co.jp>
Date: Thu, 24 Jul 2008 08:14:47 +0900
From: FUJITA Tomonori <fujita.tomonori@....ntt.co.jp>
To: joro@...tes.org
Cc: prarit@...hat.com, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-pci@...r.kernel.org, jbarnes@...tuousgeek.org,
fujita.tomonori@....ntt.co.jp
Subject: Re: [PATCH]: PCI: GART iommu alignment fixes [v2]
On Thu, 24 Jul 2008 00:10:33 +0200
Joerg Roedel <joro@...tes.org> wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 23, 2008 at 07:19:43AM -0400, Prarit Bhargava wrote:
> > pci_alloc_consistent/dma_alloc_coherent does not return size aligned
> > addresses.
> >
> > >From Documentation/DMA-mapping.txt:
> >
> > "pci_alloc_consistent returns two values: the virtual address which you
> > can use to access it from the CPU and dma_handle which you pass to the
> > card.
> >
> > The cpu return address and the DMA bus master address are both
> > guaranteed to be aligned to the smallest PAGE_SIZE order which
> > is greater than or equal to the requested size. This invariant
> > exists (for example) to guarantee that if you allocate a chunk
> > which is smaller than or equal to 64 kilobytes, the extent of the
> > buffer you receive will not cross a 64K boundary."
>
> Interesting. Have you experienced any problems because of that
> misbehavior in the GART code? AMD IOMMU currently also violates this
> requirement. I will send a patch to fix that there too.
IIRC, only PARISC and POWER IOMMUs follow the above rule. So I also
wondered what problem he hit.
--
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