From: Krzysztof Halasa <khc@pm.waw.pl>
To: James Bottomley <James.Bottomley@steeleye.com>
Cc: Linux Kernel <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
SCSI Mailing List <linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: Proposal for new generic device API: dma_get_required_mask()
Date: Sun, 20 Jun 2004 02:00:42 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <m3zn6zf68l.fsf@defiant.pm.waw.pl> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20040619212246.B8063@flint.arm.linux.org.uk> (Russell King's message of "Sat, 19 Jun 2004 21:22:46 +0100")
Russell King <rmk+lkml@arm.linux.org.uk> writes:
> The SA1111 device and associated sub-device drivers. Basically, Intel
> has a "no fix" errata where one of the address bits gets incorrectly
> routed to the SDRAM "auto precharge" address bit. This address bit
> must be zero, otherwise the SDRAM accesses are messed up.
Well, I knew about it, but I thought it's a "host" problem and device
drivers don't have to care.
> You may have a 32MB SDRAM but need to ensure that
> physical bit 20 is always zero - IOW you can only DMA from even MB
> addresses and not odd MB addresses.
I understand that currently the bit in question is cleared from the
masks, and that the ARM/SA1111 dma/pci alloc/map functions know how
to handle such mask?
Wouldn't it be better to not touch the masks (which are device
capabilities rather than platform limitations) and let alloc/map
functions always use the correct half of RAM?
Just asking, I've never worked with such thing.
--
Krzysztof Halasa, B*FH
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2004-06-20 2:01 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 18+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2004-06-17 14:08 Proposal for new generic device API: dma_get_required_mask() James Bottomley
2004-06-17 15:28 ` Matthew Wilcox
2004-06-17 20:12 ` James Bottomley
2004-06-18 0:46 ` Krzysztof Halasa
2004-06-18 1:45 ` James Bottomley
2004-06-18 23:07 ` Krzysztof Halasa
2004-06-19 15:00 ` James Bottomley
2004-06-19 23:39 ` Krzysztof Halasa
2004-06-20 16:56 ` James Bottomley
2004-06-18 9:21 ` Russell King
2004-06-18 23:10 ` Krzysztof Halasa
2004-06-19 20:22 ` Russell King
2004-06-20 0:00 ` Krzysztof Halasa [this message]
2004-06-20 19:47 ` Russell King
2004-06-23 19:32 ` Krzysztof Halasa
2004-06-18 5:59 ` Jeremy Higdon
2004-06-18 14:19 ` James Bottomley
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2004-06-17 14:52 Salyzyn, Mark
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=m3zn6zf68l.fsf@defiant.pm.waw.pl \
--to=khc@pm.waw.pl \
--cc=James.Bottomley@steeleye.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-scsi@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