[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <92B9A919-0F13-43FA-8E01-4470065A9131@kernel.crashing.org>
Date: Wed, 27 May 2009 14:05:42 -0500
From: Becky Bruce <beckyb@...nel.crashing.org>
To: FUJITA Tomonori <fujita.tomonori@....ntt.co.jp>
Cc: jeremy@...p.org, 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 May 22, 2009, at 5:51 AM, FUJITA Tomonori wrote:
> 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.
Hrm, it looks like my response to this got dropped. Fujita is correct
- we still need the dev on powerpc because we use it to get device-
specific information that is used to determining when we need to
actually bounce.
Cheers,
B
--
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