public inbox for linux-ia64@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "David S. Miller" <davem@redhat.com>
To: linux-ia64@vger.kernel.org
Subject: [Linux-ia64] Re: PCI DAC routines for SN
Date: Wed, 24 Apr 2002 04:04:10 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <marc-linux-ia64-105590701905503@msgid-missing> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <marc-linux-ia64-105590701905493@msgid-missing>

   From: Jesse Barnes <jbarnes@sgi.com>
   Date: Mon, 22 Apr 2002 16:40:14 -0700

   On Mon, Apr 22, 2002 at 04:07:33PM -0700, David Mosberger wrote:
   > Oh man, what a mess!  Have you checked with Dave Miller?  I suspect
   > he might not like this.  I'm not terribly fond of it either as it
   
   He was the one that implemented it I thought.  His assertion was that
   since most chipsets don't handle 64 bit coherent allocations well, the
   consistent interface should be forced to return a 32 bit address (is
   that right Dave?).  I don't mind that as long as we add a DAC
   consistent call, otherwise I'd like to leave it up to the platform
   (i.e. ia64/sn could return a 64 bit address and sparc64 could do 32).
   
%99 of PCI chips out there do not support DAC addressing for things
like descriptor tables etc.  So it's not a matter of "well" it's
a matter of "at all".

Therefore pci_alloc_consistent MUST provide SAC only addressing.

I was seeing patches where people would set the DMA mask for the
pci_dev around pci_alloc_consistent calls in order to accomplish
getting SAC addresses.  That is exactly the kind of crap I was
trying to avoid.

Therefore, as per the API specification
(Documentation/DMA-mapping.txt) and reality, it's unacceptable
for pci_alloc_consistent() to return anything other than SAC
addresses (or something more constrained, if the DMA mask indicates
this, for example for devices with ISA addressing limitations).

I think it is unreasonable to add a special DAC alloc consistent
call.

Is this needed because you bozos don't have any physical memory below
4GB on some weird ia64 system ___AND___ you lack a PCI IOMMU in the
controllers again?  This is getting rediculious if so, and I really
want to avoid crapping up the PCI DMA interfaces just because the ia64
PCI hardware folks keep making stupid design decisions.


  parent reply	other threads:[~2002-04-24  4:04 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 24+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2002-04-22 22:34 [Linux-ia64] Re: PCI DAC routines for SN David Mosberger
2002-04-22 22:39 ` Jesse Barnes
2002-04-22 23:07 ` David Mosberger
2002-04-22 23:40 ` Jesse Barnes
2002-04-23  1:34 ` Grant Grundler
2002-04-23 21:11 ` Grant Grundler
2002-04-24  4:04 ` David S. Miller [this message]
2002-04-24  5:49 ` Jesse Barnes
2002-04-24  5:50 ` David S. Miller
2002-04-24 16:13 ` Grant Grundler
2002-04-24 17:39 ` David S. Miller
2002-04-24 17:40 ` David S. Miller
2002-04-24 19:45 ` Jesse Barnes
2002-04-24 23:13 ` Jesse Barnes
2002-04-24 23:53 ` David S. Miller
2002-04-25  0:08 ` David S. Miller
2002-04-25  0:11 ` Jesse Barnes
2002-04-25  0:17 ` David S. Miller
2002-04-25  0:21 ` Jesse Barnes
2002-04-25  0:36 ` Jesse Barnes
2002-04-25  0:43 ` David S. Miller
2002-04-25  1:00 ` David S. Miller
2002-04-25  1:01 ` Jesse Barnes
2002-04-25  1:22 ` Jesse Barnes

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=marc-linux-ia64-105590701905503@msgid-missing \
    --to=davem@redhat.com \
    --cc=linux-ia64@vger.kernel.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox