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/

Reply via email to