Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S266489AbUFQNcp (ORCPT ); Thu, 17 Jun 2004 09:32:45 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S266488AbUFQNcp (ORCPT ); Thu, 17 Jun 2004 09:32:45 -0400 Received: from [213.146.154.40] ([213.146.154.40]:42155 "EHLO pentafluge.infradead.org") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S266482AbUFQNcl (ORCPT ); Thu, 17 Jun 2004 09:32:41 -0400 Date: Thu, 17 Jun 2004 14:32:39 +0100 From: Christoph Hellwig To: "Salyzyn, Mark" Cc: Alan Cox , Christoph Hellwig , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: PATCH: Further aacraid work Message-ID: <20040617133239.GA31936@infradead.org> Mail-Followup-To: Christoph Hellwig , "Salyzyn, Mark" , Alan Cox , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org References: <547AF3BD0F3F0B4CBDC379BAC7E4189FD23FF9@otce2k03.adaptec.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <547AF3BD0F3F0B4CBDC379BAC7E4189FD23FF9@otce2k03.adaptec.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.1i X-SRS-Rewrite: SMTP reverse-path rewritten from by pentafluge.infradead.org See http://www.infradead.org/rpr.html Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1652 Lines: 31 On Thu, Jun 17, 2004 at 08:53:36AM -0400, Salyzyn, Mark wrote: > I *must* admit that the driver functions perfectly in other systems with > more than 4G of memory; however we *are* having troubles specifically > with AMD64 systems with more than 4G of memory in 2.6 kernels (the issue > does not occur on 2.4 kernels). I have yet to investigate why this > specific problem exists. So what exactly is the firmware doing with this information? What I expected is that if the memory is smaller 4GB it's just use 32bit descriptors. If you want to keep that heck do the check _before_ setting the dma_mask. If you have a > 32bit dma mask but the firmware can't deal with the high bits in the dma address actually set it's a bug. It won't show up on PCs but pretty much on any complex architecture with an iommu (like AMD64) > One would expect that if we erroneously got the memory model wrong (ie, > <4GB of memory, one slice at 0-2G, another slice at 4G-6G) that the 32 > dma limit would protect us from functional problems in this delicate > area but with a performance hit resulting from the scsi layer providing > bounce buffers. Ideally we would like to have a mechanism to know if the > DMAable area is limited to a 32 bit address space in order to take > advantage of the more efficient FIB utilization. Again, memory model doesn't matter. For many plattforms dma address aren't memory addresses. - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/