From: fc scsi <scsi_fc_group@yahoo.com>
To: Roland Dreier <roland@topspin.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: _PAGE_PCD bit in DMAable memory
Date: Mon, 17 May 2004 08:48:31 -0700 (PDT) [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20040517154831.81383.qmail@web50005.mail.yahoo.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <52r7tjx09t.fsf@topspin.com>
Hi,
Thanks for the reply and the information. Actually,
the code will have to run on Intel Xscale
processor(ARM based). Since I don't have Linux running
on the board as of now, I was trying out things on my
i386 machine to get non-cacheable memory. That was
when I thought that GFP_DMA should give me
non-cacheable memory(_PAGE_PCD on i386 should be set
for such a memory, and L_PTE_CACHEABLE should be clear
on Xscale by this analogy). But, as you have explained
_PAGE_PCD need not be set for non-cacheable memory for
i386. I am new to Xscale architecture and don't know
if pci_alloc_consistent() will give me non-cacheable
memory or not. Can anyone who has worked on Xscale
confirm this.
Another curiousity for me is, if
pci_alloc_consistent() gives non-cacheable memory for
Xscale(arm) then will the L_PTE_CACHEABLE bit set in
it or not?
Anyway, thanks Roland for the previous answer. It was
a great help.
Regards.
--- Roland Dreier <roland@topspin.com> wrote:
> fc> Hi, I am trying to get DMAable memory on
> i386
> fc> (kmalloc(GFP_DMA,)) but seems _PAGE_PCD is
> not set on the
> fc> pages that i get back the memory from. Am I
> getting the
> fc> correct results? If yes, then is it not that
> GFP_DMA should
> fc> give me non-cacheable memory (equivalent to
> setting _PAGE_PCD
> fc> along with _PAGE_PWT on i386). Can anyone
> confirm for me that
> fc> GFP_DMA will *always* give me non-cacheable
> and contiguous
> fc> memory.
>
> On i386, the GFP_DMA flag controls _where_ the
> memory will be
> allocated, namely in the low 16 MB. This is really
> a relic of the
> days of 24-bit ISA DMA.
>
> On i386, the memory does not have to be
> non-cacheable, since in the PC
> architecture the bus controller will maintain
> consistency by snooping
> the CPU. However, to be portable, your code should
> use
> pci_alloc_consistent() to get memory for DMAing.
> This will do the
> right thing on all platforms, including making sure
> that the memory is
> non-cacheable on architectures where the bus
> controller does not snoop.
>
> (By the way, kmalloc() will always return contiguous
> memory, but you
> should still use pci_alloc_consistent for DMA
> memory)
>
> - Roland
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
SBC Yahoo! - Internet access at a great low price.
http://promo.yahoo.com/sbc/
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2004-05-17 15:48 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2004-05-17 1:12 fc scsi
2004-05-17 2:20 ` Roland Dreier
2004-05-17 15:48 ` fc scsi [this message]
[not found] <20040518190319.95305.qmail@web50004.mail.yahoo.com>
2004-05-18 20:29 ` Ingo Oeser
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20040517154831.81383.qmail@web50005.mail.yahoo.com \
--to=scsi_fc_group@yahoo.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=roland@topspin.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox
all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®