From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Roland Dreier Subject: [ofa-general] Re: mthca use of dma_sync_single is bogus Date: Tue, 10 Jul 2007 12:08:43 -0700 Message-ID: References: <20070709213913.GB20052@mellanox.co.il> <20070710141409.GH3885@ics.muni.cz> <20070710190018.GK3885@ics.muni.cz> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: In-Reply-To: <20070710190018.GK3885@ics.muni.cz> (Lukas Hejtmanek's message of "Tue, 10 Jul 2007 21:00:19 +0200") List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: general-bounces@lists.openfabrics.org Errors-To: general-bounces@lists.openfabrics.org To: Lukas Hejtmanek Cc: Keir Fraser , xen-devel@lists.xensource.com, "Michael S. Tsirkin" , general@lists.openfabrics.org List-Id: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org > I think he spoke about coherent, didn't he? On i386/x86_64, the consistent and > coherent are the same but on some architectures they are not and I think that > using consistent (in particular pci_alloc_consistent) is exactly what should > be used. Keir also recommended to use this one. coherent and consistent are synonyms. It's confusing because there is pci_alloc_consistent(), which is in general just a wrapper for dma_alloc_coherent(). > And moreover, it avoids using swiotlb and bounce buffers, I think. Am I right, > Keir? Yes, but I'm not really willing to make things worse for standard i386 just to make Xen work a little better. - R.