Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1754982AbYL1Mfh (ORCPT ); Sun, 28 Dec 2008 07:35:37 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1753829AbYL1Mf2 (ORCPT ); Sun, 28 Dec 2008 07:35:28 -0500 Received: from sh.osrg.net ([192.16.179.4]:39986 "EHLO sh.osrg.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750874AbYL1Mf2 (ORCPT ); Sun, 28 Dec 2008 07:35:28 -0500 Date: Sun, 28 Dec 2008 21:34:54 +0900 To: mingo@elte.hu Cc: fujita.tomonori@lab.ntt.co.jp, jeremy@goop.org, tony.luck@intel.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, xen-devel@lists.xensource.com, x86@kernel.org, ian.campbell@citrix.com, beckyb@kernel.crashing.org, joerg.roedel@amd.com Subject: Re: [PATCH 0 of 9] swiotlb: use phys_addr_t for pages From: FUJITA Tomonori In-Reply-To: <20081228115621.GA11954@elte.hu> References: <20081228103419.GA7128@elte.hu> <20081228195952F.fujita.tomonori@lab.ntt.co.jp> <20081228115621.GA11954@elte.hu> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <20081228213414O.fujita.tomonori@lab.ntt.co.jp> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1561 Lines: 29 On Sun, 28 Dec 2008 12:56:21 +0100 Ingo Molnar wrote: > > * FUJITA Tomonori wrote: > > > You brought up a different topic, DMA bouncing implementations > > unification. DMA bouncing implementations unification is a very nice > > cleanup. But it's not related with Becky's patch to break IA64 build at > > all. > > All i'm saying is that obviously neither Jeremy's nor Becky's patches were > created in a vacuum, and had it not been for the need and desire to extend > swiotlb we'd not have seen Becky's 9/9 cleanup patch either. As I wrote, Becky's 9/9 cleanup path is not about swiotlb highmem extention. We had known about the need to clean up the dma mapping operation ugliness. But we has ignored it and added workarounds again and again. We haven't seen something like his 9/9 because we added workarounds in architecture-specific code. Anyway, his 9/9 patch is wrong if we want to fix the root cause. If we don't fix the root cause, the lots of changes of his 9/9 patch don't make sense. Probably, it would better to add some workarounds in architecture-specific code (POWERPC in this case) as we have done in the past. Ok, I'll try to fix the root cause. We need lots of changes to IA64 especially. Hopefully, I can get Tony's ACK on these changes. -- 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/