From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Sun, 16 Sep 2001 04:03:46 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Sun, 16 Sep 2001 04:03:26 -0400 Received: from ns.virtualhost.dk ([195.184.98.160]:14605 "EHLO virtualhost.dk") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Sun, 16 Sep 2001 04:03:23 -0400 Date: Sun, 16 Sep 2001 10:03:25 +0200 From: Jens Axboe To: Daniel Phillips Cc: kelley eicher , J , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: 0-order allocation failed in 2.4.10-pre8 Message-ID: <20010916100325.B1045@suse.de> In-Reply-To: <3BA24EB0.5000402@i2net.com> <20010914210903.E806@suse.de> <20010916015917Z16125-2757+260@humbolt.nl.linux.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20010916015917Z16125-2757+260@humbolt.nl.linux.org> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Sun, Sep 16 2001, Daniel Phillips wrote: > > Use the > > > > *.kernel.org/pub/linux/kernel/people/axboe/patches/2.4.9/block-highmem-all > > > > patch and you can use highmem without having to worry about failed > > 0-order bounce pages allocations. > > Right, by using 64 bit DMA instead of bounce buffers. But aren't there cases > where the 64 bit capable hardware isn't there but somebody still wants to use > highmem? Yes of course. The common case is not 64-bit dma here though, it's just being able to DMA to highmem pages (just full 32-bit dma instead of low memory dma). And that should cover most systems out there. -- Jens Axboe