From: Matthew Wilcox <willy@debian.org>
To: "Salyzyn, Mark" <mark_salyzyn@adaptec.com>
Cc: Alan Cox <alan@redhat.com>, Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: PATCH: Further aacraid work
Date: Thu, 17 Jun 2004 14:07:13 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20040617130713.GX20511@parcelfarce.linux.theplanet.co.uk> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <547AF3BD0F3F0B4CBDC379BAC7E4189FD23FF9@otce2k03.adaptec.com>
On Thu, Jun 17, 2004 at 08:53:36AM -0400, Salyzyn, Mark wrote:
> 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.
Yes, you're not the only people who want this. There was a brief
discussion about this a few weeks ago, but I don't think anything's been
implemented yet.
It's a hard problem. Where's the right tradeoff? I have a system that
has a memory map that puts the first 3.75GB of memory at 0, then the
next 256MB at 64GB, then continues from 4GB. If there's only 4GB of
RAM in that system, I'm sure you'd rather use 32-bit descriptors and
anything in that 256MB gets bounce-buffered.
But where's the line? Who gets to decide? Is this really per-arch,
or is it per-driver, or is it somewhere else?
--
"Next the statesmen will invent cheap lies, putting the blame upon
the nation that is attacked, and every man will be glad of those
conscience-soothing falsities, and will diligently study them, and refuse
to examine any refutations of them; and thus he will by and by convince
himself that the war is just, and will thank God for the better sleep
he enjoys after this process of grotesque self-deception." -- Mark Twain
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2004-06-17 13:07 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 53+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2004-06-17 12:53 Salyzyn, Mark
2004-06-17 13:07 ` Matthew Wilcox [this message]
2004-06-17 13:19 ` Christoph Hellwig
2004-06-17 13:55 ` James Bottomley
2004-06-17 13:32 ` Christoph Hellwig
2004-06-17 14:02 ` Alan Cox
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2004-06-29 20:55 Salyzyn, Mark
2004-06-29 23:22 ` Byron Stanoszek
2004-06-30 19:52 ` Byron Stanoszek
2004-06-30 19:59 ` Dario
2004-06-29 19:27 Salyzyn, Mark
2004-06-29 20:20 ` Byron Stanoszek
2004-06-29 20:42 ` Alan Cox
2004-06-29 18:53 Salyzyn, Mark
2004-06-29 19:03 ` Byron Stanoszek
2004-06-28 13:17 Salyzyn, Mark
2004-06-18 20:53 Salyzyn, Mark
[not found] <286GI-5y3-11@gated-at.bofh.it>
[not found] ` <286Qp-5EU-19@gated-at.bofh.it>
2004-06-17 19:10 ` Andi Kleen
2004-06-17 20:54 ` Alan Cox
2004-06-17 21:13 ` James Bottomley
2004-06-17 21:25 ` Andi Kleen
2004-06-18 15:19 ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt
2004-06-18 5:57 ` Jeff Garzik
2004-06-18 14:07 ` James Bottomley
2004-06-18 15:17 ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt
2004-06-17 17:54 Salyzyn, Mark
2004-06-17 20:38 ` Alan Cox
2004-06-17 20:48 ` William Lee Irwin III
2004-06-17 20:56 ` James Bottomley
2004-06-18 15:05 ` William Lee Irwin III
2004-06-18 20:32 ` William Lee Irwin III
2004-06-27 17:33 ` James Bottomley
2004-06-17 14:39 Salyzyn, Mark
2004-06-17 14:55 ` James Bottomley
2004-06-17 14:58 ` Alan Cox
2004-06-17 15:15 ` Arjan van de Ven
2004-06-17 19:16 ` James Bottomley
2004-06-17 16:32 ` Clay Haapala
2004-06-17 16:37 ` James Bottomley
2004-06-17 16:46 ` Alan Cox
2004-06-17 15:11 ` Anton Blanchard
2004-06-16 21:04 Alan Cox
2004-06-16 21:33 ` Christoph Hellwig
2004-06-16 21:40 ` Alan Cox
2004-06-16 21:42 ` Christoph Hellwig
2004-06-16 21:48 ` Alan Cox
2004-06-16 21:58 ` Christoph Hellwig
2004-06-16 22:06 ` Alan Cox
2004-06-29 17:48 ` Byron Stanoszek
2004-06-29 18:27 ` Mark Haverkamp
2004-06-29 18:37 ` Alan Cox
2004-06-30 2:02 ` bm
2004-06-30 16:07 ` Alan Cox
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=20040617130713.GX20511@parcelfarce.linux.theplanet.co.uk \
--to=willy@debian.org \
--cc=alan@redhat.com \
--cc=hch@infradead.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mark_salyzyn@adaptec.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®