linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] x86: fix gart iommu using for amd 64 bit system

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]

Message-ID: <20091124152645.GD21821@elte.hu>
Date:	Tue, 24 Nov 2009 16:26:45 +0100
From:	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
To:	FUJITA Tomonori <fujita.tomonori@....ntt.co.jp>
Cc:	yinghai@...nel.org, hpa@...or.com, tglx@...utronix.de,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] x86: fix gart iommu using for amd 64 bit system


* FUJITA Tomonori <fujita.tomonori@....ntt.co.jp> wrote:

> > don't think user will like to use SWIOTLB instead of swiotlb.
> 
> I doubt that users care about a way to fix their problems.

As far as swiotlb vs. GART goes, arguably a non-bouncing hw based 
solution (GART) is superior to a bouncing one (swiotlb), right?

	ngo
--
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/