[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20090522194930E.fujita.tomonori@lab.ntt.co.jp>
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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists