Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1756877AbYKURDv (ORCPT ); Fri, 21 Nov 2008 12:03:51 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1753883AbYKURDk (ORCPT ); Fri, 21 Nov 2008 12:03:40 -0500 Received: from mx2.mail.elte.hu ([157.181.151.9]:53107 "EHLO mx2.mail.elte.hu" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752705AbYKURDj (ORCPT ); Fri, 21 Nov 2008 12:03:39 -0500 Date: Fri, 21 Nov 2008 18:03:21 +0100 From: Ingo Molnar To: Joerg Roedel Cc: David Woodhouse , Ingo Molnar , Thomas Gleixner , netdev@vger.kernel.org, iommu@lists.linux-foundation.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/10] DMA-API debugging facility Message-ID: <20081121170321.GH733@elte.hu> References: <1227284770-19215-1-git-send-email-joerg.roedel@amd.com> <1227286492.4901.208.camel@macbook.infradead.org> <20081121165722.GD1386@amd.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20081121165722.GD1386@amd.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.18 (2008-05-17) X-ELTE-VirusStatus: clean X-ELTE-SpamScore: -1.5 X-ELTE-SpamLevel: X-ELTE-SpamCheck: no X-ELTE-SpamVersion: ELTE 2.0 X-ELTE-SpamCheck-Details: score=-1.5 required=5.9 tests=BAYES_00 autolearn=no SpamAssassin version=3.2.3 -1.5 BAYES_00 BODY: Bayesian spam probability is 0 to 1% [score: 0.0000] Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1323 Lines: 32 * Joerg Roedel wrote: > On Fri, Nov 21, 2008 at 04:54:52PM +0000, David Woodhouse wrote: > > On Fri, 2008-11-21 at 17:26 +0100, Joerg Roedel wrote: > > > this patchset introduces code to debug drivers usage of the DMA-API. > > > Tests with hardware IOMMUs have shown several bugs in drivers > > > regarding the usage of that API. > > > Problems were found especially in network card drivers. > > > > This is really useful -- but surely it shouldn't be x86-specific? > > > > All the code except the hooks in the architecture's dma_map_single() et > > al functions could be generic, couldn't it? > > Yes, in principle we could move most of it to generic code. There is > nothing architecture specific in it. Anybody who prefers this to be > arch/x86 before moving it to lib/? yeah, we want to make it generic once it works. but my comments about the allocation needs to be addressed (see my comments on [03/10]), and solving that will likely impact the structure of the approach in a way that will generalize it anyway, as a side-effect. Ingo -- 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/