[lkml]   [2004]   [Aug]   [18]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: Does io_remap_page_range() take 5 or 6 args?
On Wed, 18 Aug 2004 15:59:15 -0700
>> Given this, will a pfn suffice?

On Wed, Aug 18, 2004 at 04:16:58PM -0700, David S. Miller wrote:
> There is an error in the calculations. 16TB "RAM", means "RAM".
> On many systems, a large chunk of the physical address space is
> taken up by I/O areas, not real memory.
> Such areas do not take up mem_map[] array space.
> Regardless, I think an "unsigned long" page frame number is sufficient
> for now. Don't even make the new type.

Oh, virtualspace footprint of IO areas is far worse, as the convention
is to direct map them into a single address space if they're ever used.
Of course this convention is much more loosely established than e.g.
struct page is for RAM. Some analogue of kmap_atomic() for such
machines to multiplex virtualspace in interrupt context would help, but
is unrelated to physical address passing issues.

-- wli
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to
More majordomo info at
Please read the FAQ at

 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 14:05    [W:0.042 / U:2.116 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site