Messages in this thread | | | Date | Fri, 11 Jan 2013 11:35:48 -0500 | From | Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH v7u1 26/31] x86: Don't enable swiotlb if there is not enough ram for it |
| |
On Thu, Jan 10, 2013 at 03:07:10PM -0800, Yinghai Lu wrote: > 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 ? > > I'd like to post the whole patchset again and ask HPA to put them in tip/next > to catch -v3.9 merging window.
I'm the frontline maintainer of swiotlb and related stuff so if you want to follow the proper protocol you should wait until I give you my Ack.
I need to check this patch out and then also test-run them on IA64, AMD-VI, Calgary-X GART and Intel VT-d to make a sanity test.
However, this particular patch can go outside the mega-patchset you have. So you could post the mega-patchset to hpa without this being in it and just mention that there is this extra one that Konrad is handling.
| |