From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753772AbYDDXJw (ORCPT ); Fri, 4 Apr 2008 19:09:52 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1752592AbYDDXJo (ORCPT ); Fri, 4 Apr 2008 19:09:44 -0400 Received: from smtp121.sbc.mail.sp1.yahoo.com ([69.147.64.94]:40245 "HELO smtp121.sbc.mail.sp1.yahoo.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id S1752575AbYDDXJn (ORCPT ); Fri, 4 Apr 2008 19:09:43 -0400 DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=s1024; d=pacbell.net; h=Received:X-YMail-OSG:X-Yahoo-Newman-Property:From:To:Subject:Date:User-Agent:Cc:References:In-Reply-To:MIME-Version:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-Disposition:Message-Id; b=mFpiZvgqTYQ6gRiooGViMTjhqdAjaJuExix4Uu/70HxsYqN6suGWus1PCUD/irc8aPnUh3GLcvVO1s4ptuT/TPbUj81P/k079RHblQ02+S5CQa3XO2lyrHxJILKqmRWxJLdqY80+5vxSoSijOdv5VhkhfUVMG5p+XyDqkjMbwjw= ; X-YMail-OSG: fazvV_kVM1kIVaYEiUetTv4ph.qZqP9JZAvBkh2l8Y3CCaKdMOkBZlqNcPd0y3IG3zCIKGeF0Q-- X-Yahoo-Newman-Property: ymail-3 From: David Brownell To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.arm.linux.org.uk Subject: Re: [PATCH] jffs2 summary allocation Date: Fri, 4 Apr 2008 16:09:40 -0700 User-Agent: KMail/1.9.6 Cc: Andrew Morton , Michael Trimarchi , dwmw2@infradead.org, spi-devel-general@lists.sourceforge.net, linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org References: <713171.37644.qm@web26213.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> <20080404124812.d39fa640.akpm@linux-foundation.org> In-Reply-To: <20080404124812.d39fa640.akpm@linux-foundation.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Message-Id: <200804041609.41092.david-b@pacbell.net> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Friday 04 April 2008, Andrew Morton wrote: > I'm assuming from the trace that the arm code tried to put that memory > under DMA (or at least, passed it into part of the DMA management code to > get the various caches sorted out) and that the arm DMA support code > doesn't like being given vmalloced memory. Actually, Documentation/DMA-Mapping.txt has a section right up front called "What memory is DMA'able?" ... which despite its ungrammatical title, says clearly: ... This means specifically that you may _not_ use the memory/addresses returned from vmalloc() for DMA. ... So I'm rather surprised to see *ANY* kernel code trying to do that. That rule has been in effect for many, many years now. - Dave