Messages in this thread | | | Date | Fri, 4 Nov 2011 14:44:53 -0400 | From | Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH] TTM DMA pool v2.2 or [GIT PULL] (stable/ttm.dma_pool.v2.3) for 3.3 |
| |
> > git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/konrad/xen.git stable/ttm.dma_pool.v2.3 > > > > On what hw did you tested ? With and without xen ? Here radeon
On AMD and Intel. And with both Nvidia and Radeon cards. 64-bit cards (I have a patch where I forced the 64-bit card to use the TTM DMA pool code to test) and 32-bit cards (ATI ES1000)
On baremetal and Xen. Um, Fedora Core 16 as distro.
Oh, and I also tried PPC (Power Mac 4) but could not get it to boot the 3.1 kernel. Something with the LILO grub loader did not work.
> that doesn't need dma32 doesn't work when forcing swiotlb which > kind of expected i guess. Should we expose if swiotlb is enabled
You did 'swiotlb=force' ? > forced so we use dma pool in such case ?
Hm, it shoudl have enabled itself. The swiotlb_nr_tlb would return some contents and we would.. Oh, you mean you did a 64-bit card _and_ did swiotlb=force. And since the rdev->dma32 was set to zero it did _not_ use the TTM DMA pool.
Right. I did not do it initially just so that I could limit the scope in case I messed up something in the code. But the code has the 'no_dma' parameter, so it can easily turn off the DMA TTM code.
So, to answer your question - sure, we can ignore the rdev_dma32 and just use the the swiotlb_nr_tlb to check.
BTW, thank you for taking a spin with these patches and rebasing them on top of yours. I am going to start testing them and reviewing the latest batch you sent on Monday.
| |