[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20190313183254.GC4926@lst.de>
Date: Wed, 13 Mar 2019 19:32:54 +0100
From: Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>
To: Julien Grall <julien.grall@....com>
Cc: Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>, Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>,
Robin Murphy <robin.murphy@....com>,
Juergen Gross <jgross@...e.com>,
Stefano Stabellini <sstabellini@...nel.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk <konrad.wilk@...cle.com>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Mike Rapoport <rppt@...ux.ibm.com>,
"open list:IOMMU DRIVERS" <iommu@...ts.linux-foundation.org>,
Joerg Roedel <jroedel@...e.de>,
xen-devel <xen-devel@...ts.xenproject.org>,
Boris Ostrovsky <boris.ostrovsky@...cle.com>,
Marek Szyprowski <m.szyprowski@...sung.com>
Subject: Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH] Revert "swiotlb: remove SWIOTLB_MAP_ERROR"
On Fri, Mar 08, 2019 at 05:25:57PM +0000, Julien Grall wrote:
> In the common case, Dom0 also contains the PV backend drivers. Those
> drivers may directly use the guest buffer in the DMA request (so a copy is
> avoided). To avoid using a bounce buffer too much, xen-swiotlb will find
> the host physical address associated to the guest buffer and will use it to
> compute the DMA address.
>
> While Dom0 kernel may only deal with 32-bit physical address, the
> hypervisor can still deal with up to 40-bit physical address. This means
> the guest memory can be allocated above the 4GB threshold. Hence why the
> dma_addr_t is always 64-bit with CONFIG_XEN=y.
This at least makes some sense. But is it really so much better to
avoid having a 64-bit phys_addr_t?
Powered by blists - more mailing lists