[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20180428083347.GC31684@infradead.org>
Date: Sat, 28 Apr 2018 01:33:47 -0700
From: Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>
To: Christopher Lameter <cl@...ux.com>
Cc: Matthew Wilcox <willy@...radead.org>,
Michal Hocko <mhocko@...nel.org>,
Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>,
"Luis R. Rodriguez" <mcgrof@...nel.org>, linux-mm@...ck.org,
Jan Kara <jack@...e.cz>, matthew@....cx, x86@...nel.org,
luto@...capital.net, martin.petersen@...cle.com,
jthumshirn@...e.de, broonie@...nel.org, linux-spi@...r.kernel.org,
linux-scsi@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
"lsf-pc@...ts.linux-foundation.org"
<lsf-pc@...ts.linux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: [LSF/MM TOPIC NOTES] x86 ZONE_DMA love
On Fri, Apr 27, 2018 at 11:36:23AM -0500, Christopher Lameter wrote:
> On Fri, 27 Apr 2018, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
>
> > Some devices have incredibly bogus hardware like 28 bit addressing
> > or 39 bit addressing. We don't have a good way to allocate memory by
> > physical address other than than saying "GFP_DMA for anything less than
> > 32, GFP_DMA32 (or GFP_KERNEL on 32-bit) for anything less than 64 bit".
> >
> > Even CMA doesn't have a "cma_alloc_phys()". Maybe that's the right place
> > to put such an allocation API.
>
> The other way out of this would be to require a IOMMU?
Which on many systems doesn't exist. And even if it exists might not
be usable.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists