On Tue, 12 Nov 2013, Rob Herring wrote:
> On 11/12/2013 11:27 AM, Stefano Stabellini wrote:
> > Russell gave a great explanation of the issue so I am just going to
> > limit myself to answering to:
> >
> > On Tue, 12 Nov 2013, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk wrote:
> >>> Considering that we know that the sw
On 11/12/2013 11:27 AM, Stefano Stabellini wrote:
> Russell gave a great explanation of the issue so I am just going to
> limit myself to answering to:
>
> On Tue, 12 Nov 2013, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk wrote:
>>> Considering that we know that the swiotlb buffer has a low address,
>>> skip the check.
Russell gave a great explanation of the issue so I am just going to
limit myself to answering to:
On Tue, 12 Nov 2013, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk wrote:
> > Considering that we know that the swiotlb buffer has a low address,
> > skip the check.
>
> I am not following that sentence. Could you please ex
On Tue, Nov 12, 2013 at 09:48:32AM -0500, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 12, 2013 at 02:12:00PM +, Stefano Stabellini wrote:
> > Many ARM devices do not set the dma_mask correctly today.
> > As a consequence dma_capable fails for them regardless of the address
> > passed to it.
>
>
On Tue, Nov 12, 2013 at 02:12:00PM +, Stefano Stabellini wrote:
> Many ARM devices do not set the dma_mask correctly today.
> As a consequence dma_capable fails for them regardless of the address
> passed to it.
Wouldn't the DMA API debug warn of bad usage.
> In xen_swiotlb_map_page we curren
Many ARM devices do not set the dma_mask correctly today.
As a consequence dma_capable fails for them regardless of the address
passed to it.
In xen_swiotlb_map_page we currently use dma_capable to check if the
address returned by the swiotlb is good for dma for the device.
However the check would
6 matches
Mail list logo
