[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20100410124912.GP30801@buzzloop.caiaq.de>
Date: Sat, 10 Apr 2010 14:49:12 +0200
From: Daniel Mack <daniel@...aq.de>
To: Pedro Ribeiro <pedrib@...il.com>
Cc: Alan Stern <stern@...land.harvard.edu>,
Robert Hancock <hancockrwd@...il.com>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, akpm@...ux-foundation.org,
Greg KH <gregkh@...e.de>, alsa-devel@...a-project.org,
linux-usb@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: USB transfer_buffer allocations on 64bit systems
On Fri, Apr 09, 2010 at 07:19:22PM +0100, Pedro Ribeiro wrote:
> On 9 April 2010 19:09, Daniel Mack <daniel@...aq.de> wrote:
> > On Fri, Apr 09, 2010 at 12:01:27PM -0400, Alan Stern wrote:
> >> I don't see anything suspicious. The transfer_buffer addresses repeat
> >> every 32 URBs, and the DMA addresses cycle almost entirely uniformly
> >> from 0x20000000 to 0x23ffffff in units of 0x2000 (there are a few gaps
> >> where the interval is a little bigger).
> >
> > The DMA pointers do indeed look sane. I wanted to take a deeper look at
> > this and set up a 64bit system today. However, I fail to see the problem
> > here. Pedro, how much RAM does your machine have installed?
> >
> > Daniel
> >
> >
>
> It has 4 GB.
Upgraded my machine now to 4GB, but I still can't reproduce this bug.
Pedro, can you send your config, please?
Daniel
--
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