On Mon, Nov 12, 2007 at 12:50:01PM +0200, Muli Ben-Yehuda wrote: > On Wed, Nov 07, 2007 at 04:21:04PM +0200, Amit Shah wrote: > > > We make the dma_mapping_ops structure to point to our structure so > > that every DMA access goes through us. (This is the reason this only > > works for 64-bit guest. 32-bit guest doesn't yet have a dma_ops > > struct.) > > I need the same facility for Calgary for falling back to swiotlb if a > translation is disabled on some slot, and IB needs the same facility > for some IB adapters (e.g., ipath). Perhaps it's time to consider > stackable dma-ops (unless someone has a better idea...).
Stackable dma-ops sounds good to me. The only problem is that there is a performance penalty for devices handled on the bottom of the stack. But the alternative I can think of, a per-device dma-ops structure, uses more memory and is much more intrusive to the driver core. So I am fine with a stackable solution. Joerg -- | AMD Saxony Limited Liability Company & Co. KG Operating | Wilschdorfer Landstr. 101, 01109 Dresden, Germany System | Register Court Dresden: HRA 4896 Research | General Partner authorized to represent: Center | AMD Saxony LLC (Wilmington, Delaware, US) | General Manager of AMD Saxony LLC: Dr. Hans-R. Deppe, Thomas McCoy - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/