public inbox for linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: James Bottomley <James.Bottomley@steeleye.com>
To: Martin Diehl <lists@mdiehl.de>
Cc: Linux Kernel <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [Patch] dma_sync_to_device
Date: 14 Feb 2004 17:34:51 -0500	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <1076798095.1611.4.camel@mulgrave> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0402140328350.17970-100000@notebook.home.mdiehl.de>

On Sat, 2004-02-14 at 03:51, Martin Diehl wrote:
> Ok, will do.
> 
> Just to make sure I got you right, your concern is people mixing up the 
> effect of this call with some means to sync with posted writes on iomem 
> mapped memory location provided by some device on the bus? I.e. the 
> situation where they probably want to use readl() or similar to force the 
> posted writes to complete in contrast to sync_to_device which ensures the 
> modified system memory gets synced before the busmastering starts?

Yes, that's it.

> If so, wouldn't this concern be related to the pci_dma api as a whole, not 
> only the new pci_dma_sync_to_device call particularly? I mean, none of the 
> api functions to deal with consistent or streaming maps of system memory 
> are applicable for flushing posted writes to iomem on the bus. Maybe the 
> confusion comes from the fact on some archs the pci_dma_sync call would 
> have to flush posted writes _from_ the busmaster device to system memory?

Well ... people did ask, even in the old api.  The excuse always was
that the cache coherency aspect deals exclusively with the CPU cache. 
Now you're adding an API specifically to deal with possible bus caches,
I just wanted it to be crystal clear that you can't use the bus cache
API for flushing posted writes.

James



  reply	other threads:[~2004-02-14 22:35 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 21+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2004-02-13 14:27 [Patch] dma_sync_to_device James Bottomley
2004-02-14  8:51 ` Martin Diehl
2004-02-14 22:34   ` James Bottomley [this message]
2004-02-14 23:18   ` David S. Miller
  -- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2004-02-10 17:31 Martin Diehl
2004-02-10 18:42 ` David S. Miller
2004-02-10 18:59   ` Martin Diehl
2004-02-11  6:17 ` Deepak Saxena
2004-02-11  6:51   ` Martin Diehl
2004-02-11 16:39     ` Deepak Saxena
2004-02-11 17:51       ` David S. Miller
2004-02-11 18:18     ` Matt Porter
2004-02-11 18:30       ` David S. Miller
2004-02-11 18:57         ` Deepak Saxena
2004-02-11 19:08           ` David S. Miller
2004-02-12  3:46             ` Deepak Saxena
2004-02-12  3:58               ` David S. Miller
2004-02-13  1:49             ` Jamie Lokier
2004-02-14  7:24               ` David S. Miller
2004-02-11 19:23         ` Matt Porter
2004-02-11 19:30           ` David S. Miller

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=1076798095.1611.4.camel@mulgrave \
    --to=james.bottomley@steeleye.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=lists@mdiehl.de \
    /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