Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1756073AbYAFNeS (ORCPT ); Sun, 6 Jan 2008 08:34:18 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1752621AbYAFNeG (ORCPT ); Sun, 6 Jan 2008 08:34:06 -0500 Received: from mo10.iij4u.or.jp ([210.138.174.78]:51791 "EHLO mo10.iij4u.or.jp" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752215AbYAFNeF (ORCPT ); Sun, 6 Jan 2008 08:34:05 -0500 Date: Sun, 6 Jan 2008 22:33:42 +0900 To: just.for.lkml@googlemail.com Cc: tomof@acm.org, akpm@linux-foundation.org, jarkao2@gmail.com, herbert@gondor.apana.org.au, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, neilb@suse.de, bfields@fieldses.org, netdev@vger.kernel.org, tom@opengridcomputing.com, fujita.tomonori@lab.ntt.co.jp Cc: fujita.tomonori@lab.ntt.co.jp Subject: Re: 2.6.24-rc6-mm1 From: FUJITA Tomonori In-Reply-To: <64bb37e0801060335k4afb3134u9c6fadb57d525dc5@mail.gmail.com> References: <64bb37e0801060241o2c6d8172r73b69291fce76ce1@mail.gmail.com> <20080106202616Z.tomof@acm.org> <64bb37e0801060335k4afb3134u9c6fadb57d525dc5@mail.gmail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <20080106223650E.tomof@acm.org> X-Dispatcher: imput version 20040704(IM147) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 2219 Lines: 55 On Sun, 6 Jan 2008 12:35:35 +0100 "Torsten Kaiser" wrote: > On Jan 6, 2008 12:23 PM, FUJITA Tomonori wrote: > > On Sun, 6 Jan 2008 11:41:10 +0100 > > "Torsten Kaiser" wrote: > > > I will applie your patch and see if this hunk from > > > find_next_zero_area() makes a difference: > > > > > > end = index + nr; > > > - if (end > size) > > > + if (end >= size) > > > return -1; > > > - for (i = index + 1; i < end; i++) { > > > + for (i = index; i < end; i++) { > > > if (test_bit(i, map)) { > > > > The patch should not make a difference for X86_64. > > Hmm... > arch/x86/kernel/pci-gart_64.c: > alloc_iommu() calls iommu_area_alloc() > lib/iommu-helper.c: > iommu_area_alloc() calls find_next_zero_area() > -> so the above code should be called even on X86_64 Oops, I meant that the patch fixes the align allocation (non zero align_mask case). X86_64 doesn't use the align allocation. > And the change in the for loop means that 'index' will now be tested, > but with the old code it was not. With the old code, 'index' is tested by find_next_zero_bit. With the new code and non zero align_mask case, 'index' is not tested by find_next_zero_bit. So test_bit needs to start with 'index'. So If I understand the correctly, this patch should not make a difference for x86_64 though I might miss something. > And double using something does fit with the errors I'm seeing... > > > Can you try the patch to revert my IOMMU changes? > > > > http://www.mail-archive.com/linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org/msg12694.html > > Testing for this bug is a little bit slow, as I'm compiling ~100 > packages trying to trigger it. > If my current testrun with the patch from > http://www.mail-archive.com/linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org/msg12702.html > crashes, I will revert the hole IOMMU changes with above patch and try again. Thanks for testing, -- 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/