lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2013]   [Jan]   [10]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
From
Date
SubjectRe: [PATCH v7u1 26/31] x86: Don't enable swiotlb if there is not enough ram for it
Yinghai Lu <yinghai@kernel.org> writes:

> On Wed, Jan 9, 2013 at 1:15 PM, Yinghai Lu <yinghai@kernel.org> wrote:
>> On Wed, Jan 9, 2013 at 1:00 PM, Eric W. Biederman <ebiederm@xmission.com> wrote:
>>> Yinghai Lu <yinghai@kernel.org> writes:
>>>
>>>> please check updated attached. It should address all your request.
>>>
>>> There is one significant bug that I can see.
>>>
>>> swiotlb_print_info tests no_iotlb_memory but no_iotlb_memory is set
>>> after swiotlb_init_with_tlb returns.
>>
>> there is another swiotlb_print_info calling from
>> pci_swiotlb_late_init
>>
>> void __init pci_swiotlb_late_init(void)
>> {
>> /* An IOMMU turned us off. */
>> if (!swiotlb)
>> swiotlb_free();
>> else {
>> printk(KERN_INFO "PCI-DMA: "
>> "Using software bounce buffering for IO (SWIOTLB)\n");
>> swiotlb_print_info();
>> }
>> }
>>
>> so we need that checking when swiotlb == 1, but actually we can not
>> allocate that before.
>
> Eric, so the code is right to put checking in swiotlb_print_info ?

My biggest question was really why you didn't set no_iotlb
sooner. But shrug I didn't see any real issue with the code except
for it being silly.

Certainly since we are calling swiotlb_print_info from outside swiotlb.c
the check is needed.

> I'd like to post the whole patchset again and ask HPA to put them in tip/next
> to catch -v3.9 merging window.

Eric


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2013-01-11 01:01    [W:0.451 / U:0.084 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site