From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail.lst.de (verein.lst.de [213.95.11.210]) (using TLSv1 with cipher EDH-RSA-DES-CBC3-SHA (168/168 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4ED78DDF8F for ; Sun, 4 Mar 2007 16:17:49 +1100 (EST) Date: Sun, 4 Mar 2007 06:17:38 +0100 From: Christoph Hellwig To: Benjamin Herrenschmidt Subject: Re: [PATCH] DMA 4GB boundary protection Message-ID: <20070304051738.GA30747@lst.de> References: <1172872183.5310.145.camel@goblue> <20070302222748.GA1206@lixom.net> <1172910451.8184.51.camel@localhost.localdomain> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii In-Reply-To: <1172910451.8184.51.camel@localhost.localdomain> Cc: Olof Johansson , linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org, paulus@samba.org List-Id: Linux on PowerPC Developers Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , On Sat, Mar 03, 2007 at 09:27:31AM +0100, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote: > - Drivers are broken -today- and I doubt they can all be audited and > fixed (and fixes bacported to distros) quickly Which drivers? All requests coming from the block layer make sure you never span the 4GB boundary, and IIRC that same is true for networking. Similarly dma_alloc_coherent and pci_alloc_consinstant only allocate from the lower 4G unless told otherwise. A driver writer would have to be extra-ordinarily stuid to get this wrong. (And yes, some driver writers are..)