[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-id: <alpine.LFD.2.00.1010131627220.2764@xanadu.home>
Date: Wed, 13 Oct 2010 16:32:31 -0400 (EDT)
From: Nicolas Pitre <nico@...xnic.net>
To: Kevin Cernekee <cernekee@...il.com>
Cc: Ralf Baechle <ralf@...ux-mips.org>, Gary King <gking@...dia.com>,
dediao@...co.com, ddaney@...iumnetworks.com, dvomlehn@...co.com,
sshtylyov@...sta.com, linux-mips@...ux-mips.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 2/2] MIPS: HIGHMEM DMA on noncoherent MIPS32 processors
On Wed, 13 Oct 2010, Kevin Cernekee wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 13, 2010 at 12:53 AM, Ralf Baechle <ralf@...ux-mips.org> wrote:
> > It's this disabling of interrupts which I don't like. It's easy to get
> > around it by having one kmap type for each of process, softirq and
> > interrupt context.
>
> I am curious as to why ARM opted for the "pte push/pop" strategy
> (kmap_high_l1_vipt()) instead of something along these lines?
>
> Is there a reason why using 3 kmap types to solve the "interrupted
> flush problem" would work for MIPS, but is not a good solution on ARM?
It would probably be a good solution for ARM as well.
Nicolas
Powered by blists - more mailing lists