[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20091125072504.GA6568@elte.hu>
Date: Wed, 25 Nov 2009 08:25:04 +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:
> On Tue, 24 Nov 2009 16:26:45 +0100
> Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu> wrote:
>
> >
> > * 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?
>
> Yeah, but GART is not a real IOMMU that always does address
> translation. If users want performance, they need 64bit DMA capable
> devices to skip GART. With such devices, GART and SWIOTLB are same.
>
> So this hacky GART workaround is useful for only people who use non
> 64bit DMA devices and broken BIOS with GART. IMO, it's not worth
> having the workaround.
Well, what Yinghai is saying that for that (nonzero) subset of people
this change is a regression, and his patch fixes that. We dont do
regressions so this needs to be addressed.
Thanks,
Ingo
--
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