Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67;
Date:   Tue, 17 Apr 2018 10:54:37 +0200 (CEST)
From:   Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
To:     David Wang <davidwang@zhaoxin.com>
cc:     'Christoph Hellwig' <hch@infradead.org>, mingo@redhat.com,
        hpa@zytor.com, gregkh@linuxfoundation.org, x86@kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, brucechang@via-alliance.com,
        cooperyan@zhaoxin.com, qiyuanwang@zhaoxin.com,
        benjaminpan@viatech.com, lukelin@viacpu.com, timguo@zhaoxin.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] x86/dma-mapping: override via_no_dac for new VIA PCI
 bridges
In-Reply-To: <000001d3d628$4e91a4c0$ebb4ee40$@zhaoxin.com>
Message-ID: <alpine.DEB.2.21.1804171052440.1694@nanos.tec.linutronix.de>
References: <000001d3d628$4e91a4c0$ebb4ee40$@zhaoxin.com>
User-Agent: Alpine 2.21 (DEB 202 2017-01-01)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

On Tue, 17 Apr 2018, David Wang wrote:
> > On Mon, Apr 16, 2018 at 05:26:56PM +0800, David Wang wrote:
> > > PCI bridges integrated in new VIA chipset/SoC have no DAC issue.
> > > Enable DAC for the platforms with these chipset/SoC can improve DMA
> > > performance about 20% when DRAM size > 4GB.
> > >
> > 
> > So we get an exception to an exception?  Is there any way to figure out
> the
> > PCI IDs actually affected?
> Yes.
> 
> Do you mean we should list the PCI IDs of the PCI bridges which have no DAC
> issue?

The question was rather to have a list of PCI IDs for those chipsets which
have the problem and set the 'disable' flag only for those. That makes a lot
more sense than making a list of new chips which disable the disable flag.

Thanks,

	tglx