[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <SA1PR21MB1335CF4B7E9B1EC61B84AA03BF909@SA1PR21MB1335.namprd21.prod.outlook.com>
Date: Wed, 5 Apr 2023 06:00:13 +0000
From: Dexuan Cui <decui@...rosoft.com>
To: Petr Tesařík <petr@...arici.cz>
CC: Dexuan-Linux Cui <dexuan.linux@...il.com>,
Petr Tesarik <petrtesarik@...weicloud.com>,
Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>,
Marek Szyprowski <m.szyprowski@...sung.com>,
Robin Murphy <robin.murphy@....com>,
Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk <konrad.wilk@...cle.com>,
Jianxiong Gao <jxgao@...gle.com>,
David Stevens <stevensd@...omium.org>,
Joerg Roedel <jroedel@...e.de>,
"open list:DMA MAPPING HELPERS" <iommu@...ts.linux.dev>,
open list <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Roberto Sassu <roberto.sassu@...wei.com>,
"Michael Kelley (LINUX)" <mikelley@...rosoft.com>,
Tianyu Lan <Tianyu.Lan@...rosoft.com>,
"linux-hyperv@...r.kernel.org" <linux-hyperv@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: RE: [PATCH v1 2/2] swiotlb: Fix slot alignment checks
> From: Petr Tesařík <petr@...arici.cz>
> Sent: Tuesday, April 4, 2023 10:51 PM
> > ...
> > Argh, you're right. This is a braino. The alignment mask is in fact an
> > INVERTED mask, i.e. it masks off bits that are not relevant for the
> > alignment. The more strict alignment needed the more bits must be set,
> > so the individual alignment constraints must be combined with an OR
> > instead of an AND.
> >
> > Can you apply the following change and check if it fixes the issue?
>
> Actually, this will not work either. The mask is used to mask off both
It works for me.
> high address bits and low address bits (below swiotlb slot granularity).
>
> What should help is this:
> ...
This also works for me.
Thanks, *either* version can resolve the issue for me :-)
Powered by blists - more mailing lists