On Tuesday, October 2, 2007 6:04 pm [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 28, 2007 at 03:43:39PM -0700, David Miller wrote:
> >
> > My only beef with this patch set is that it seems
> > a bit much to create a totally new function name every
> > time we want to set some kind of new attribute o
On Fri, Sep 28, 2007 at 03:43:39PM -0700, David Miller wrote:
>
> My only beef with this patch set is that it seems
> a bit much to create a totally new function name every
> time we want to set some kind of new attribute on some
> DMA object. Why not add a "dma_set_flags()" or similar
> that
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Thu, 27 Sep 2007 18:09:26 -0700
>
> On Altix, DMA may be reordered between a device and host memory.
> This reordering can happen in the NUMA interconnect, and it usually
> results in correct operation and improved performance. In some
> situations it may be neces
On Altix, DMA may be reordered between a device and host memory.
This reordering can happen in the NUMA interconnect, and it usually
results in correct operation and improved performance. In some
situations it may be necessary to explicitly synchronize DMA from
the device.
This patchset allow
On Wed, Sep 26, 2007 at 12:49:50AM -0600, Grant Grundler wrote:
[edited out several points that I think have been already
addresed by others in this thread.]
>
> Defining it terms of completion queues won't mean much to most folks.
> Better to add a description of completion queues to the D
> Can we define this API to provide the same semantics as the memory
> that dma_alloc_coherent() returns?
No, definitely not. The property of the mapping here is all about
ordering with respect to other DMAs (from the same device) and nothing
to do with coherency between the CPU's and device's
On Tuesday, September 25, 2007 11:49:50 pm Grant Grundler wrote:
> Upon reading the "2) Platforms that permit DMA reordering", I think I
> have been confusing coherency with ordering. I think I have because DMA
> is leaving the "PCI domain", crossing an "unordered domain" (NUMA,
> interconnect), an
[+jejb to cc]
On Tue, Sep 25, 2007 at 04:58:43PM -0700, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> This is a followup to http://lkml.org/lkml/2007/8/24/280
>
> Despite Grant's desire for a more elegant solution, there's
> not much new here. I moved the API change from pci.h to
> dma-mapping.h and removed the p
This is a followup to http://lkml.org/lkml/2007/8/24/280
Despite Grant's desire for a more elegant solution, there's
not much new here. I moved the API change from pci.h to
dma-mapping.h and removed the pci_ prefix from the name.
Problem Description
---
On Altix, DMA may be r
9 matches
Mail list logo
