[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <50D2E0C102000078000B1B1C@nat28.tlf.novell.com>
Date: Thu, 20 Dec 2012 08:56:17 +0000
From: "Jan Beulich" <JBeulich@...e.com>
To: "Dongxiao Xu" <dongxiao.xu@...el.com>
Cc: "xen-devel@...ts.xen.org" <xen-devel@...ts.xen.org>,
"Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk" <konrad.wilk@...cle.com>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: RE: [Xen-devel] [PATCH] xen/swiotlb: Exchange to contiguous
memory for map_sg hook
>>> On 20.12.12 at 02:23, "Xu, Dongxiao" <dongxiao.xu@...el.com> wrote:
> Sorry, maybe I am still not describing this issue clearly.
No, at least I understood you the way you re-describe below.
> Take the libata case as an example, the static DMA buffer locates
> (dev->link->ap->sector_buf , here we use Data Structure B in the graph) in
> the following structure:
>
> -------------------------------------Page boundary
> <Data Structure A>
> <Data Structure B>
> -------------------------------------Page boundary
> <Data Structure B (cross page)>
> <Data Structure C>
> -------------------------------------Page boundary
>
> Where Structure B is our DMA target.
>
> For Data Structure B, we didn't care about the simultaneous access, either
> lock or sync function will take care of it.
> What we are not sure is "read/write of A and C from other processor". As we
> will have memory copy for the pages, and at the same time, other CPU may
> access A/C.
The question is whether what libata does here is valid in the first
place - fill an SG list entry with something that crosses a page
boundary and is not a compound page.
Jan
--
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